Jump to content

Dem Election Cheating


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

What a weasel. Again, Mueller was the first of 3 investigations that establish that collusion did, in fact, happen.

LOL - mueller specifically said there was no evidence of collusion. And nothing criminal. repeating a lie doesn't make it true little guy.

You can lie to your heart's content - doesn't change the facts.

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

And read your own damn cite, liar. 

 

OK -

Documents have shown the FBI invested significant resources attempting to corroborate the dossier and relied substantially on it to obtain surveillance warrants targeting the former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

But since its publication, core aspects of the dossier have been exposed as unsupported and unproven rumors. A special counsel assigned to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation charged one of Steele’s sources with lying to the FBI and charged a cybersecurity lawyer who worked for Clinton’s campaign with lying to the FBI during a 2016 meeting in which he relayed concerns about the Russia-based Alfa Bank.

Trump, who has railed against the dossier for years, released a statement celebrating the agreement and once again denouncing the dossier as “a Hoax funded by the DNC and the Clinton Campaign”.

 

Well there you go :)

 

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

The Clinton campaign and DNC had argued that the payments had been described accurately, but agreed, according to the documents, to settle without conceding to avoid further legal costs.

Yep . they paid over 100 grand.  Everybody pays 100 grand becuase they're innocent right? LOL

 THey got busted - they knew they couldn't win, they paid the cash :)

How many fines did trump pay for 'russian collusion'? Oh ... right...  none

And once again - your hypocrisy is plain as day for all to see :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

LOL - mueller specifically said there was no evidence of collusion. And nothing criminal. repeating a lie doesn't make it true little guy.

You can lie to your heart's content - doesn't change the facts.

 

OK -

Documents have shown the FBI invested significant resources attempting to corroborate the dossier and relied substantially on it to obtain surveillance warrants targeting the former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

But since its publication, core aspects of the dossier have been exposed as unsupported and unproven rumors. A special counsel assigned to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation charged one of Steele’s sources with lying to the FBI and charged a cybersecurity lawyer who worked for Clinton’s campaign with lying to the FBI during a 2016 meeting in which he relayed concerns about the Russia-based Alfa Bank.

Trump, who has railed against the dossier for years, released a statement celebrating the agreement and once again denouncing the dossier as “a Hoax funded by the DNC and the Clinton Campaign”.

 

Well there you go :)

 

Yep . they paid over 100 grand.  Everybody pays 100 grand becuase they're innocent right? LOL

 THey got busted - they knew they couldn't win, they paid the cash :)

How many fines did trump pay for 'russian collusion'? Oh ... right...  none

And once again - your hypocrisy is plain as day for all to see :)

Once again, you are lying. Mueller DID NOT say that they was no evidence of collusion. He says there was not sufficient evidence to charge anyone with criminal conspiracy. 

“We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term,” Mueller added. “Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.”

But his investigation did verify a number of the Russian contacts, including the Kilimnik meeting.

The Republican-lied Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Rubio, built on that to establish that, indeed, among the many sketchy Russian contacts, Manafort did share sensitive information with a Russian intelligence officer (Kilimnik, an officer confirmed to be involved in the election interference campaign). But what the Russian agent did with the information was not publicly confirmed at the time.

A third report that came out with the Biden administration announced sanctions against Russia, and it confirmed that Kilimnik took Manafort's gift back to the Kremlin.

It actually happened. It's all documented, and you know it. That's why loyal sheep like you have switched to saying, "Well, if it happened, no big deal. Russia could have conducted their own research if they wanted."

 

I know you're not very bright "little guy," but you should be able to avoid conflating the only-partially-verified Steele dossier with the well-documented Trump-Russia collusion established in multiple US government reports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Once again, you are lying. Mueller DID NOT say that they was no evidence of collusion. He says there was not sufficient evidence to charge anyone with criminal conspiracy. 

Criminal conspiracy is collusion. It's just the legal name of it. Here's the dictionary def: An often secret action taken by two or more parties to achieve an illegal or improper purpose. Criminal conspiracy is collusion.

There's no evidence of collusion. If you prefer conspiracy sure - you were the one who mentioned collusion in the first place.

So - you lied again.

16 minutes ago, Hodad said:

 

But his investigation did verify a number of the Russian contacts,

Sure. Just like Clinton's campaign had.

16 minutes ago, Hodad said:

The Republican-lied Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Rubio, built on that to establish that, indeed, among the many sketchy Russian contacts, Manafort did share sensitive information with a Russian intelligence officer (Kilimnik, an officer confirmed to be involved in the election interference campaign). But what the Russian agent did with the information was not publicly confirmed at the time.

Sensitive information... like polling data?

You know the russians can have a poll done in the US at any time.

And interesting - none of this was ever used in a visual way.

Wheras we KNOW the information from the steele dossier was shared. No doubt there.

16 minutes ago, Hodad said:

A third report that came out with the Biden administration announced sanctions against Russia, and it confirmed that Kilimnik took Manafort's gift back to the Kremlin.

And?

16 minutes ago, Hodad said:

It actually happened.

What happened? You havne't shown ANY collusion or conspiracy or anything remotely illegal.  They shared a poll according to you.

ZERO collusion. So you lied.

16 minutes ago, Hodad said:

 

I know you're not very bright "little guy," but you should be able to avoid conflating the only-partially-verified Steele dossier with the well-documented Trump-Russia collusion established in multiple US government reports. 

The democrats admitted to compiling and turning over the steel dossier and paying for it. It is 100 percent verified and 100 percent political.

See - the fact you'd need to lie is pretty telling.

So lets recap.

So trumps people gave nothing of any import to the russians, there was no evidence of any kind of conspiracy or secret plan, and they did nothing wrong and the FBI found no evidence.

Meanwhile Clinton Paid Russians to come up with Fake info about trump and tried to pass that off as legit to the fbi for direct political gain.

And you and your ilk are still claiming that trump did something illegal.

There are dung beetles out there who are more respectable than you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Criminal conspiracy is collusion. It's just the legal name of it. Here's the dictionary def: An often secret action taken by two or more parties to achieve an illegal or improper purpose. Criminal conspiracy is collusion.

There's no evidence of collusion. If you prefer conspiracy sure - you were the one who mentioned collusion in the first place.

 

No, collusion need not be illegal and it is not strictly synonymous with any specific charge, but if it helps you feel like you've saved face you can open your own dictionary and just scratch out the word "or." I'm sure you won't mind if the rest of us continue to read it as written.

 

Quote

Sensitive information... like polling data?

You know the russians can have a poll done in the US at any time.

Proprietary polling/targeting data and campaign strategy. You know, to better coordinate the Russian interference in Trumps favor. -- And again, we have you hand-waving the fact that a farking US presidential campaign provided information to a foreign intelligence service that was waging an interference campaign against the American people. The gravity and severity of that statement cannot be overstated, and your attempt at normalization is as stupid as saying that sending supplies to Ukraine is no big deal because they could have purchased their own ammo. ?

Quote

And interesting - none of this was ever used in a visual way.
 

I'm assuming that you mean "visible way" but that's a pretty absurd standard for a covert intelligence op. 

Quote

 

What happened? You havne't shown ANY collusion or conspiracy or anything remotely illegal.  They shared a poll according to you.

ZERO collusion. So you lied.

That is a lie. You have been given the information. You are no longer ignorant. You are simply choosing to lie about it. Collusion is established with certainty. It's part of the historical record of this era. Whether convictions could be secured is a question for the courts. Or perhaps would have been in Trump hadn't pardoned the key players to ensure their silence.

 

Quote

The democrats admitted to compiling and turning over the steel dossier and paying for it. It is 100 percent verified and 100 percent political.

No, they didn't. You are lying. Steele, compiled and turned over the Steele dossier. Hence the name. Most of the gathered intel in the dossier is unverified and likely fiction. Some of it, however, are confirmed, like the Russia contacts. Neither the Clinton campaign nor the DNC have admitted anything of the sort, because it simply didn't happen. -- And even Danchenko was acquitted of lying. 

 

^^And your recap is just lies stacked on lies. Pure fiction pulled from your FOX news fueled vision board. Unfortunately for you, just wishing and wishing for things to be true is not going to work 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hodad said:

No, collusion need not be illegal and it is not strictly synonymous with any specific charge,

So as long as you use the definition that he did nothing wrong and there was no scheme .. then it was collusion :)

You're an !diot :)

12 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Proprietary polling/targeting data and campaign strategy.

The russians can get the same proprietary polling done and they're free to share their campaign strategy with anyone. That's like a conversation - "hey, we're up 20 points in our internall polling and we think if we focus on clinton's corruption we can win'. 

thats a total non issue.

Asking for fake information to smear a rival candidate and then trying to sell it ot the FBI as  legit while hiding your spending however...

14 minutes ago, Hodad said:

That is a lie. You have been given the information.

The information says no collusion. The liar here is you.  And you try to excuse that lie by changing the definition of 'collusion' till it fits just so you can continue to use the word. It's pathetic.

Quote

No, they didn't.

Of course they did. Naming the employee who did the work doesn't change that.  THEY did it. They commissioned it, they paid for it, they paid for the bribes to the russians (who gave fake info), and they shipped it to the FBI.

That's like trying to say that if a company is guilty of bribing someone it's not the company, it's bob in accounting who prepared the cheque  :) 

So - recap.

  • There's no collusion unless you change the definition of collusion to fit. Trump did nothing wrong.
  • The dems have admitted they worked with the russians and paid to have a dossier with fake attack info against their rival prepared and released to the fbi.
  • Mueller after years of searching with a huge team found no evidence of any wrongdoing or what the dictionary would refer to as 'collusion. at all
  • Hillary's campaign and party had to fork over 100 grand or more to pay for her lying about the funding of the report.

At the end of the day trump did not "collude" with any russians, did nothing wrong or illegal, and the dems lied about it for 3 years.

Thanks for playing :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So as long as you use the definition that he did nothing wrong and there was no scheme .. then it was collusion :)

You're an !diot :)

The russians can get the same proprietary polling done and they're free to share their campaign strategy with anyone. That's like a conversation - "hey, we're up 20 points in our internall polling and we think if we focus on clinton's corruption we can win'. 

thats a total non issue.

Asking for fake information to smear a rival candidate and then trying to sell it ot the FBI as  legit while hiding your spending however...

The information says no collusion. The liar here is you.  And you try to excuse that lie by changing the definition of 'collusion' till it fits just so you can continue to use the word. It's pathetic.

Of course they did. Naming the employee who did the work doesn't change that.  THEY did it. They commissioned it, they paid for it, they paid for the bribes to the russians (who gave fake info), and they shipped it to the FBI.

That's like trying to say that if a company is guilty of bribing someone it's not the company, it's bob in accounting who prepared the cheque  :) 

So - recap.

  • There's no collusion unless you change the definition of collusion to fit. Trump did nothing wrong.
  • The dems have admitted they worked with the russians and paid to have a dossier with fake attack info against their rival prepared and released to the fbi.
  • Mueller after years of searching with a huge team found no evidence of any wrongdoing or what the dictionary would refer to as 'collusion. at all
  • Hillary's campaign and party had to fork over 100 grand or more to pay for her lying about the funding of the report.

At the end of the day trump did not "collude" with any russians, did nothing wrong or illegal, and the dems lied about it for 3 years.

Thanks for playing :)

Lol, no as anyone in the thread can see, the recap is that you are a shameless liar who cannot and will not even try to support the bullshit you spew.

If you were American your "It's okay to help Russian intelligence target Americans," position would make you a traitor. Since you're Canadian, it just makes you a scumbag.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

Lol, no as anyone in the thread can see, the recap is that you are a shameless liar who cannot and will not even try to support the bullshit you spew.

That's not what they're seeing bud :)  

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

If you were American your "It's okay to help Russian intelligence target Americans," position would make you a traitor.

Odd then that they haven't charged trump with being  a traitor and in fact the fbi said he didn't commit any crimes :)  LOLOLOL -  i don't think you thought that one through very well :)

So far clinton's campain and the dems are the only ones charged for their activities with the russians.

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

Since you're Canadian, it just makes you a scumbag.

 

Awww muffin :) You so maaad.  You should have a cookie and a nap.

Sorry the truth doesn't work for you kiddo. But your therapy issues are not my responsibility.

  • There's no collusion Trump did nothing wrong. The fbi says so.
  • The dems have admitted they worked with the russians and paid to have a dossier with fake attack info against their rival prepared and released to the fbi.
  • Mueller after years of searching with a huge team found no evidence of any wrongdoing. Few people have been investigated more thoroughly.
  • Hillary's campaign and party had to fork over 100 grand or more to pay for her lying about the funding of the steele report because they illegally hid the spending.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s a little something to reduce dem election stealing and fraud.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/27/appeals-court-upholds-florida-voting-restrictions-00094327

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A federal appeals court sided with Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday when it overturned a lower court’s decision on a controversial voting law.

That law, approved by the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature in 2021, placed restrictions on the use of drop boxes and set new requirements for voter registration groups, among other things. A federal judge in March 2022 ruled that the law was discriminatory against minorities and placed unconstitutional burdens on voters.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

Here’s a little something to reduce dem election stealing and fraud.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/27/appeals-court-upholds-florida-voting-restrictions-00094327

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A federal appeals court sided with Gov. Ron DeSantis on Thursday when it overturned a lower court’s decision on a controversial voting law.

That law, approved by the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature in 2021, placed restrictions on the use of drop boxes and set new requirements for voter registration groups, among other things. A federal judge in March 2022 ruled that the law was discriminatory against minorities and placed unconstitutional burdens on voters.

 

The thing is we've had all that in canada for decades, yet routinely get better voter turn out that the states federally.

The idea that this is suppression is just ridiculous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2023/05/10/new-filing-in-kari-lake-election-integrity-case/

“New evidence shows Maricopa County falsely certified that it passed L&A testing and then secretly tested all of the tabulators on three different days. It also shows they KNEW that 260 of the tabulators WOULD FAIL on Election Day.”

…”New evidence also shows that Director of Elections Scott Jarrett gave FALSE TESTIMONY at trial concerning the BOD printers failures that caused the tabulators to malfunction.”

“For these reasons (among others we will get to in a moment), Lake is asking for relief from judgment (basically a do-over) under Rule 60(b). If you have newly discovered evidence that you couldn’t have had in time for the previous trial or the fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of the opposing party, you can request what Lake is requesting. And they sure do.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sharkman said:

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2023/05/10/new-filing-in-kari-lake-election-integrity-case/

“New evidence shows Maricopa County falsely certified that it passed L&A testing and then secretly tested all of the tabulators on three different days. It also shows they KNEW that 260 of the tabulators WOULD FAIL on Election Day.”

…”New evidence also shows that Director of Elections Scott Jarrett gave FALSE TESTIMONY at trial concerning the BOD printers failures that caused the tabulators to malfunction.”

“For these reasons (among others we will get to in a moment), Lake is asking for relief from judgment (basically a do-over) under Rule 60(b). If you have newly discovered evidence that you couldn’t have had in time for the previous trial or the fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of the opposing party, you can request what Lake is requesting. And they sure do.”

 

1. Worst conspiracy theory ever is that the Republicans running the Maricopa county elections rigged it to sabotage themselves. But if you insist, you should probably move this to a thread about Republican election cheating.

2. Even accusations against Republicans should be from a reputable source, not this garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2023 at 6:58 PM, CdnFox said:

LOL - mueller specifically said there was no evidence of collusion. And nothing criminal. repeating a lie doesn't make it true little guy.

You can lie to your heart's content - doesn't change the facts.

 

OK -

Documents have shown the FBI invested significant resources attempting to corroborate the dossier and relied substantially on it to obtain surveillance warrants targeting the former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

But since its publication, core aspects of the dossier have been exposed as unsupported and unproven rumors. A special counsel assigned to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation charged one of Steele’s sources with lying to the FBI and charged a cybersecurity lawyer who worked for Clinton’s campaign with lying to the FBI during a 2016 meeting in which he relayed concerns about the Russia-based Alfa Bank.

Trump, who has railed against the dossier for years, released a statement celebrating the agreement and once again denouncing the dossier as “a Hoax funded by the DNC and the Clinton Campaign”.

 

Well there you go :)

 

Yep . they paid over 100 grand.  Everybody pays 100 grand becuase they're innocent right? LOL

 THey got busted - they knew they couldn't win, they paid the cash :)

How many fines did trump pay for 'russian collusion'? Oh ... right...  none

And once again - your hypocrisy is plain as day for all to see :)

Interesting Fact: The Steele Dossier was funded by Republican Primary candidates seeking to defeat Trump. After Trump won enough primaries, they peddled this opposition research to the DNC.

But the Republican-funded part is ok, right, because your team is allowed to do that.  They get a pass.  It’s not a crime unless a D is doing it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, sharkman said:

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2023/05/10/new-filing-in-kari-lake-election-integrity-case/

“New evidence shows Maricopa County falsely certified that it passed L&A testing and then secretly tested all of the tabulators on three different days. It also shows they KNEW that 260 of the tabulators WOULD FAIL on Election Day.”

…”New evidence also shows that Director of Elections Scott Jarrett gave FALSE TESTIMONY at trial concerning the BOD printers failures that caused the tabulators to malfunction.”

“For these reasons (among others we will get to in a moment), Lake is asking for relief from judgment (basically a do-over) under Rule 60(b). If you have newly discovered evidence that you couldn’t have had in time for the previous trial or the fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of the opposing party, you can request what Lake is requesting. And they sure do.”

 

Kari Lake loses these stupid lawsuits every single time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

Interesting Fact: The Steele Dossier was funded by Republican Primary candidates seeking to defeat Trump. After Trump won enough primaries, they peddled this opposition research to the DNC.

But the Republican-funded part is ok, right, because your team is allowed to do that.  They get a pass.  It’s not a crime unless a D is doing it. 

That’s fake news put out by the Hilary Clinton team.  Spread far and wide by a willing cheerleader Media.  The truth is it was either Clinton’s operatives or Obama’s.  
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/446050-did-brits-warn-about-steeles-credibility-before-muellers-probe-congress/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

Interesting Fact: The Steele Dossier was funded by Republican Primary candidates seeking to defeat Trump. After Trump won enough primaries, they peddled this opposition research to the DNC.

Interesting fact - only the DNC and hillary's campaign was directly have been found to have hired Steele and they got in major crap and paid big dough for hiding the funding.

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

But the Republican-funded part is ok, right, because your team is allowed to do that.  They get a pass.  It’s not a crime unless a D is doing it. 

Sorry but the story is bullshit.  The money has been long since traced. Steele was commissioned by the dems.  And ONLY the dems tried to peddle it as a legit document and tried to use it as an excuse to get an fbi investigation going.

Please. Do better than that with your trolling. That was extemely low effort.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

That’s fake news put out by the Hilary Clinton team.  Spread far and wide by a willing cheerleader Media.  The truth is it was either Clinton’s operatives or Obama’s.  
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/446050-did-brits-warn-about-steeles-credibility-before-muellers-probe-congress/

 

Truth too tough for you to accept? Boo Hoo.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/us/politics/trump-dossier-paul-singer.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2023 at 7:48 PM, Hodad said:

Jeebus. You'the like a bullshit factory, mass producing the same crap posts months after month. Do you have macros set up?

As always, a mix of half-truths, lies and misinformation, and most debunked many times over. But full points for consistency.

?

The Left can't debunk shit. 

Oh, sure, you can prop up "fact checkers" and pretend they're legit, but we all know they're lying. lol

Face it, diapers, you can try to deceive the public for only so long before they throw your lies back in your faces. 

Edited by Deluge
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Deluge said:

The Left can't debunk shit. 

Oh, sure, you can prop up "fact checkers" and pretend they're legit, but we all know they're lying. lol

Face it, diapers, you can try to deceive the public for only so long before they throw your lies back in your faces. 

If you cannot be honest how do you expect to convince anyone that you’re right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Ummmm.... so turns out you were lying i guess.

A conservative website, not the republicans.  the story even contradicts itself - no surprise for the post - starting off by noting that the website is not a republican website, and in fact is only partially funded by someone who SUPPORTS the republicans but is NOT a republican himself. He does not represent the party.

And - they didn't create the steele dossier, they just hired the company that would later produce it at the request of the dems.

Soooo - not funded by republicans, and not the steele dossier.

Soooo - no, the republcians did not pay for the steele dossier nor did anyone other than the dems.  Someone hired them to do background research  on presidental candidates (not just trump) but not to produce a fake dossier to release to the public

Pretty much all candidates get their backgrounds checked by their party. That's a normal thing,

It is NOT normal to create a FAKE set of allegations with the help of foreign nationals and send it to the FBI.

Wow. Way off base there weren't you. 

If you have to lie to make a point you probably don't have a very good point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/11/2023 at 9:06 AM, Rebound said:

If you cannot be honest how do you expect to convince anyone that you’re right?

You can't handle the honesty. 

Besides, I don't need to convince people like you; I just need to throw your lies back in your faces. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.azmirror.com/2023/05/15/kari-lake-granted-new-trial-must-prove-maricopa-county-ignored-signature-verification-rules/

And the judge in the case, who ruled late Monday that Lake can take her sole remaining claim to trial on Wednesday, made clear that the former GOP gubernatorial nominee has her work cut out for her: She must prove her allegations by “clear and convincing evidence,” something he noted she hasn’t yet done in her monthslong litigation trying to toss out the November election.

Noting that Lake’s allegation of election fraud “leaps over a substantial gap in the evidence presented,” Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson wrote in a ruling Monday ordering the new trial that the evidence she has presented “falls far below what is needed to establish a basis for fraud.”


Funny how the judge is pre-judging the case.  Also funny, he gives her a trial which means there appears to be a possible case of election fraud.  But then he comments on how weak her case is.  Then why give her a court date to present her case?

It won’t matter on appeal anyway.  As soon as some uncompromised judges deliberate over the evidence, things will start to happen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/11/2023 at 11:17 AM, CdnFox said:

Ummmm.... so turns out you were lying i guess.

A conservative website, not the republicans.  the story even contradicts itself - no surprise for the post - starting off by noting that the website is not a republican website, and in fact is only partially funded by someone who SUPPORTS the republicans but is NOT a republican himself. He does not represent the party.

And - they didn't create the steele dossier, they just hired the company that would later produce it at the request of the dems.

Soooo - not funded by republicans, and not the steele dossier.

Soooo - no, the republcians did not pay for the steele dossier nor did anyone other than the dems.  Someone hired them to do background research  on presidental candidates (not just trump) but not to produce a fake dossier to release to the public

Pretty much all candidates get their backgrounds checked by their party. That's a normal thing,

It is NOT normal to create a FAKE set of allegations with the help of foreign nationals and send it to the FBI.

Wow. Way off base there weren't you. 

If you have to lie to make a point you probably don't have a very good point.

I see you’re running with the “plausible deniability” defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, sharkman said:

https://www.azmirror.com/2023/05/15/kari-lake-granted-new-trial-must-prove-maricopa-county-ignored-signature-verification-rules/

And the judge in the case, who ruled late Monday that Lake can take her sole remaining claim to trial on Wednesday, made clear that the former GOP gubernatorial nominee has her work cut out for her: She must prove her allegations by “clear and convincing evidence,” something he noted she hasn’t yet done in her monthslong litigation trying to toss out the November election.

Noting that Lake’s allegation of election fraud “leaps over a substantial gap in the evidence presented,” Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson wrote in a ruling Monday ordering the new trial that the evidence she has presented “falls far below what is needed to establish a basis for fraud.”


Funny how the judge is pre-judging the case.  Also funny, he gives her a trial which means there appears to be a possible case of election fraud.  But then he comments on how weak her case is.  Then why give her a court date to present her case?

It won’t matter on appeal anyway.  As soon as some uncompromised judges deliberate over the evidence, things will start to happen.

 

No, it’s because Lake has already had a string of court losses and she’s trying to get yet another stupid show trial. The judge, who’s already ruled in her case, said her new trial has limited scope based on her legal arguments.  IOW, it’s not a complete new trial, because all that nonsense of hers has already had its day in court.  
 

IOW, when you lose in court, you don’t get to go back over and over with the same arguments and the same evidence, hoping for a different outcome.  
 

Quoting from your article:

”In the initial December trial that Thompson presided over, and in a February appeal, both courts shot down all of Lake’s claims in her election challenge, ruling they were either improper to bring before the court in such a case or that they were not backed by the facts. The Arizona Supreme Court in March dismissed all of Lake’s claims except for one, regarding signature verification processes, which it sent back to Thompson for review, saying that the judge had improperly dismissed it.”

So she gets a two day hearing to present her claims about signature verification. The County insists her claim is untrue and they can prove it in court, so Lake has little chance of prevailing. 

Edited by Rebound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rebound said:

I see you’re running with the “plausible deniability” defense.

No that would be the 'facts and truth' defense. :)

When you say 'republicans did this thing", then it turns out they had nothing to do with it, you run into a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,746
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...