Rasmussen: Evidence of election fraud

[gatomontes99]

Some context here. The above X post is a thread with pictures of an affidavit, signed by a poll worker in Wisconsin. The poll worker details unusual activity. Specifically that paper ballots were being tabulated AFTER poll watchers were sent home. Then, an email is included where (someone appearing to be managerial in nature) applauds a worker for getting just the right amount of ballots in.

 

 

Do these things have innocent intent? Possibly. But that is why we have investigations. That is why the certification should have been paused.

When we don't get it right and we ignore the possibility that we are being defrauded, we lose our country.

Edited July 8, 2024 by gatomontes99

[CdnFox]

As I have said, it's not enough for the election to be free and fair, it must be seen to be free and fair. And that's where the united states is failing horribly

They need to change the laws to guarantee that it is so difficult to cheat that people simply would not find that it is credible that someone did without clear evidence. Currently that is not the case at all

[robosmith]

Talk about "suspicious," 3 1/2 years later some rando decides to file an affidavit.

And you want an "investigation." That ship sailed LONG AGO. Duh

Nothing to see here. LMAO 

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Talk about "suspicious," 3 1/2 years later some rando decides to file an affidavit.

And you want an "investigation." That ship sailed LONG AGO. Duh

Nothing to see here. LMAO 

Why is the affidavit anonymous? How do we know it’s real? 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Why is the affidavit anonymous? How do we know it’s real? 

And furthermore, why are parts of 2 paragraphs missing?

[Hodad]

After 60+ court cases and numerous recounts and audits, 3.5 years later THIS random, unverified Internet post will unravel the most scrutinized election in US history. Promise, you guys won't end up looking like gullible fools again.

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, Rebound said:

Why is the affidavit anonymous? How do we know it’s real? 

There's nothing real here... people using Twitter to drum up unfocused dissent.  Our enemies are laughing at us.

[User]

12 hours ago, robosmith said:

Talk about "suspicious," 3 1/2 years later some rando decides to file an affidavit.

And you want an "investigation." That ship sailed LONG AGO. Duh

Nothing to see here. LMAO 

And of course, you thought the same thing with E Jean Carroll coming out some 20 years later?

 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, User said:

And of course, you thought the same thing with E Jean Carroll coming out some 20 years later?

 

False equivalence. What Carroll claimed was EXACTLY what Trump BRAGGED ABOUT DOING on the Access Hollywood TAPE. Duh

It doesn't matter what I thought, the JURY CONVICTED Trump.

[Nationalist]

Interesting.

Sooo...all the Libbie cheating is coming out eh? You disgusting fcks.

I hope, when he takes back the Whitehouse, that he goes after all the Libbie cheaters and liars and fckin' cages them all!

[reason10]

13 hours ago, robosmith said:

Talk about "suspicious," 3 1/2 years later some rando decides to file an affidavit.

And you want an "investigation." That ship sailed LONG AGO. Duh

Nothing to see here. LMAO 

You Nazis can't elect a candidate legally.

The ship didn't sail. And the perpetrators (along with Joe and pretty much MOST of the DemoNazi party) belongs in PRISON.

[Legato]

What's odd is the people who claim they would never cheat in elections are horrified by a stop cheating in elections bill.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

[User]

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

False equivalence. What Carroll claimed was EXACTLY what Trump BRAGGED ABOUT DOING on the Access Hollywood TAPE. Duh

It doesn't matter what I thought, the JURY CONVICTED Trump.

LOL

You are dismissing this affidavit before any investigation because it is 3.5 years old. 

Trump did not brag about doing anything to her on tape. 

 

[robosmith]

17 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Interesting.

Sooo...all the Libbie cheating is coming out eh? You disgusting fcks.

I hope, when he takes back the Whitehouse, that he goes after all the Libbie cheaters and liars and fckin' cages them all!

Not so interesting that you BUY THIS BULLSHIT. There were dozens of TIMELY BULLSHIT affidavits that MEANT NOTHING in COURT. Which is WHY Trump LOST 60+ legal challenges. Duh

14 minutes ago, reason10 said:

You Nazis can't elect a candidate legally.

The ship didn't sail. And the perpetrators (along with Joe and pretty much MOST of the DemoNazi party) belongs in PRISON.

Your ^OPINION means less than NOTHING, TOP TROLL.

 

Edited July 9, 2024 by robosmith

[robosmith]

10 minutes ago, Legato said:

What's odd is the people who claim they would never cheat in elections are horrified by a stop cheating in elections bill.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

Wow! ^TROLLING completely out of the blue.

[robosmith]

10 minutes ago, User said:

LOL

You are dismissing this affidavit before any investigation because it is 3.5 years old. 

It is a JOKE. And you are a naive lDIOT.

10 minutes ago, User said:

Trump did not brag about doing anything to her on tape. 

He bragged about doing it to MANY women.

"When you're a star, they let you do it." 🤮

[West]

13 hours ago, robosmith said:

Talk about "suspicious," 3 1/2 years later some rando decides to file an affidavit.

And you want an "investigation." That ship sailed LONG AGO. Duh

Nothing to see here. LMAO 

You support election rigging. Sad

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, West said:

You support election rigging. Sad

Are all of the court cases that were brought and failed the result of Democrat interference with the justice system ?

[Nationalist]

18 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Not so interesting that you BUY THIS BULLSHIT. There were dozens of TIMELY BULLSHIT affidavits that MEANT NOTHING in COURT. Which is WHY Trump LOST 60+ legal challenges. Duh

Your ^OPINION means less than NOTHING, TOP TROLL.

 

LOL...LOSER!

[West]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are all of the court cases that were brought and failed the result of Democrat interference with the justice system ?

From what's come out about the Democrats, it's not a stretch to believe they interfered in the election

[Nationalist]

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

It is a JOKE. And you are a naive lDIOT.

He bragged about doing it to MANY women.

"When you're a star, they let you do it." 🤮

And you're just jealous as Hell...ain't ya.

[gatomontes99]

9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Are all of the court cases that were brought and failed the result of Democrat interference with the justice system ?

No. Those failed because there was no remedy. Basically, for a court to handle any law suit, the plaintiff must show harm, cause and propose a remedy. With all of our ballots deidentified to protect voter rights, it is impossible to show how illegal ballots effected the election.

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, West said:

From what's come out about the Democrats, it's not a stretch to believe they interfered in the election

But it's a stretch to believe it happened in the totality, to the scale that would be required.

So there appears to be some limit, at least, to how much they would be able to rig the process.  Especially given that the Democrats haven't won every single case in every court either.

So, what I'm looking for is an idea of scale here, and what - to you - would be considered an "outlandish" claim as to how much power the Democrats have ?  Because outlandish claims happen, I'm sure you agree.

[Nationalist]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

But it's a stretch to believe it happened in the totality, to the scale that would be required.

So there appears to be some limit, at least, to how much they would be able to rig the process.  Especially given that the Democrats haven't won every single case in every court either.

So, what I'm looking for is an idea of scale here, and what - to you - would be considered an "outlandish" claim as to how much power the Democrats have ?  Because outlandish claims happen, I'm sure you agree.

Mike this argument is sick.

"Oh they cheated but not enough to change the election results."

NO CHEATING is acceptable Mike.!

[Deluge]

14 hours ago, robosmith said:

Talk about "suspicious," 3 1/2 years later some rando decides to file an affidavit.

And you want an "investigation." That ship sailed LONG AGO. Duh

Nothing to see here. LMAO 

There's ALWAYS something to see when democrats are involved, and we need to find out whether these two were helping the hair sniffer get into office.