California Election Fraud Charges Coming

[robosmith]

20 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Bill Essayli (Republican, Muslim) says he will be bringing election fraud charges as soon as Cali is certified. 

I know, I know. The left is going to say they haven't seen proof. But they don't advertise the proof before the charges. He says he needs the elections certified to bring the charges. Let's see what the scope of the charges are and if this can invalidate an election. To do that, there would have to be proof of whom the fraud benefited. 

Wiki bio

We all KNOW that Trump's DoJ will file the most frivolous charges on Trump's orders. AKA nothing to do with EVIDENCE.

And their FAILURE to CONVICT record is UNPRECEDENTED for Federal prosecutions. LMAO

But keep diggin your hole. It is most amusing,

[gatomontes99]

11 hours ago, John Johnston said:

You people are Mor0ns. Lmao. 

 

5 hours ago, John Johnston said:

Moronic. 

 

5 hours ago, John Johnston said:

Moronic. 

 

5 hours ago, John Johnston said:

Moronic. People are very tired of the  Manbaby crying wolf everyday. 

Wow. Your debate prowess is amazing. Rule #2: when the left can't debate they attack the person.

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

We all KNOW that Trump's DoJ will file the most frivolous charges on Trump's orders. AKA nothing to do with EVIDENCE.

And their FAILURE to CONVICT record is UNPRECEDENTED for Federal prosecutions. LMAO

But keep diggin your hole. It is most amusing,

You can't attack anything the DOJ does against libs after what they did from 2016 to 2024. You get what you gave. 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

You can't attack anything the DOJ does against libs after what they did from 2016 to 2024. You get what you gave. 

It was ALL BASED ON EVIDENCE. Trump admin FAILS to  CONVICT because THEY HAVE NONE.

YOUR PROBLEM is you STILL BELIEVE the PATHOLOGICAL LIAR like all your FELLOW MAGAt.

[gatomontes99]

12 hours ago, robosmith said:

It was ALL BASED ON EVIDENCE.

Evidence that the CIA fabricated because Obama told them to. 

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Evidence that the CIA fabricated because Obama told them to. 

That's simply not true. Twitter lied to you.

 

[Barquentine]

On 6/9/2026 at 7:23 PM, gatomontes99 said:

Bill Essayli (Republican, Muslim) says he will be bringing election fraud charges as soon as Cali is certified. 

Because? https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/06/california-governor-primary-hilton-advances/ 
"Republican Steve Hilton will advance to the November general election in the race for California governor."

Gotta be rigged, right?

[gatomontes99]

3 hours ago, Hodad said:

That's simply not true. Twitter lied to you.

 

Literally came from the DNI. Released by Tulsi but it was completed in Nov 2020. 

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/DIG/DIG-Declassified-HPSCI-Report-Manufactured-Russia-Hoax-July2025.pdf

Reality just does not support your fantasies. 

3 hours ago, Barquentine said:

Because? https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/06/california-governor-primary-hilton-advances/ 
"Republican Steve Hilton will advance to the November general election in the race for California governor."

Gotta be rigged, right?

Because they have something. He did not say what. 

[Fluffypants]

3 hours ago, Barquentine said:

Because? https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/06/california-governor-primary-hilton-advances/ 
"Republican Steve Hilton will advance to the November general election in the race for California governor."

Gotta be rigged, right?

State Vs Local big difference and easier to cheat in local than state.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Literally came from the DNI. Released by Tulsi but it was completed in Nov 2020. 

https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/DIG/DIG-Declassified-HPSCI-Report-Manufactured-Russia-Hoax-July2025.pdf

Reality just does not support your fantasies. 

Because they have something. He did not say what. 

Yes, I know it came from Gabbard. We've literally had this conversation before. She pulled a bait and switch. She said that all along the Obama administration knew that the Russians hadn't hacked our voting infrastructure. Yes, that's true. But the investigation was not about that, it was about the social voter manipulation campaign, which absolutely did happen. 

[gatomontes99]

4 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Yes, I know it came from Gabbard. We've literally had this conversation before. She pulled a bait and switch. She said that all along the Obama administration knew that the Russians hadn't hacked our voting infrastructure. Yes, that's true. But the investigation was not about that, it was about the social voter manipulation campaign, which absolutely did happen. 

Lmao ... No. That is not what this report is about. Try reading it. 

Brennan made up the info on Obama's orders: DNI Press release

Brennan was peddling the false reports: PBS

And the link from my first reply shows how flawed the reports were. No one is disputing Russia spent a small amount of money on Facebook to run ads. But we do dispute that Trump Russia collusion was anything other than a hoax.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Lmao ... No. That is not what this report is about. Try reading it. 

Brennan made up the info on Obama's orders: DNI Press release

A "press release" is NOT EVIDENCE. Show us OBJECTIVE REPORTING.

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Brennan was peddling the false reports: PBS

And the link from my first reply shows how flawed the reports were. No one is disputing Russia spent a small amount of money on Facebook to run ads. But we do dispute that Trump Russia collusion was anything other than a hoax.

Nothing your link says "false reports" which is why YOU QUOTED NOTHING FROM IT. LMAO

[gatomontes99]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

A "press release" is NOT EVIDENCE. Show us OBJECTIVE REPORTING.

It is when attached to the press release is the evidence. 

 

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Nothing your link says "false reports" which is why YOU QUOTED NOTHING FROM IT. LMAO

I didn't quote it because it was a scanned document and I would either have to screen shot, crop and attach or type each point out. I am not going to do that. 

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Lmao ... No. That is not what this report is about. Try reading it. 

Brennan made up the info on Obama's orders: DNI Press release

Brennan was peddling the false reports: PBS

And the link from my first reply shows how flawed the reports were. No one is disputing Russia spent a small amount of money on Facebook to run ads. But we do dispute that Trump Russia collusion was anything other than a hoax.

WTF? That is EXACTLY what this report is about. YOU try reading it. 

And I quote:
 

• On December 7, 2016, after the election, talking points were prepared for DNI James Clapper stating, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.”
• On December 9, 2016, President Obama’s White House gathered top National Security Council Principals for a meeting that included James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and others, to discuss Russia.
• After the meeting, DNI Clapper’s Executive Assistant sent an email to IC leaders tasking them with creating a new IC assessment “per the President’s request” that details the “tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.” It went on to say, “ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS.”
  
  Two different assessments on two different topics: cyberattacks on infrastructure vs influence campaign. 🤪

[gatomontes99]

2 minutes ago, Hodad said:

WTF? That is EXACTLY what this report is about. YOU try reading it. 

And I quote:
 

• On December 7, 2016, after the election, talking points were prepared for DNI James Clapper stating, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.”
• On December 9, 2016, President Obama’s White House gathered top National Security Council Principals for a meeting that included James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and others, to discuss Russia.
• After the meeting, DNI Clapper’s Executive Assistant sent an email to IC leaders tasking them with creating a new IC assessment “per the President’s request” that details the “tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.” It went on to say, “ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS.”
  
  Two different assessments on two different topics: cyberattacks on infrastructure vs influence campaign. 🤪

How do you come to that conclusion? The report I submitted talks about how the CIA used bad intelligence practices to come to conclusions that are not supported. 

Then, the press release you quoted talks about how there were emails from the White House, reminding the CIA to do what the President asked. 

We see the report detailing the work that was so bad it had to be intentional and the command to produce that work and your response is it did not happen. 

Be the partisan hack that refuses to believe his own eyes. That's a you problem. 

As for this subject, that you two derailed, there is real evidence and real prosecutions. No made up CIA files, no new laws designed just to attack one person, no bundling of misdemeanors to bypass statute of limitations, no bringing file folders to create a more dramatic photo shoot...just evidence. 

[Hodad]

1 minute ago, gatomontes99 said:

How do you come to that conclusion? The report I submitted talks about how the CIA used bad intelligence practices to come to conclusions that are not supported. 

Then, the press release you quoted talks about how there were emails from the White House, reminding the CIA to do what the President asked. 

We see the report detailing the work that was so bad it had to be intentional and the command to produce that work and your response is it did not happen. 

Be the partisan hack that refuses to believe his own eyes. That's a you problem. 

As for this subject, that you two derailed, there is real evidence and real prosecutions. No made up CIA files, no new laws designed just to attack one person, no bundling of misdemeanors to bypass statute of limitations, no bringing file folders to create a more dramatic photo shoot...just evidence. 

You know that Trump told Gabbard to flood the zone. You just fell for it. Your claim is that Obama knew Russia didn't do anything but that he directed the IC to make up evidence. That's entirely false. 

This is the sequence of events:
Did they hack us? Nope.
Did they run an influence campaign? Yep.
Okay, give me a report on that. 

You have to be farking insane to think that amounts to a contradiction or a presidential directive to make up evidence. That's utter lunacy. But Gabbard got that message in the Twitterverse and it's been in your head ever since.  


I didn't derail this subject. You brought this up. Give yourself a talking to. And another one for being so gullible. 

And you're super confident about this "evidence" you saw someone kinda talk about on Youtube. What's the Trump DOJ record on these political prosecutions so far? But you fall for it every time. Wake up. They guy is a corrupt, criminal, pathological liar who has perverted our justice system and is manipulating you and others like you. Find your dignity. Break the cycle of abuse. 

[gatomontes99]

Evidence:

 

 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Evidence:

 

 

Well that sort of settles it, doesn't it.

Of course, the Demoncrats will hide behind "plausible deniability" but...common sense says different.

Call the mayoral primary a wash...invalid...then send in Lara Trump and her crew to monitor the LA and state elections.

Edited 7 hours ago by Nationalist

[Nationalist]

21 hours ago, Hodad said:

You know that Trump told Gabbard to flood the zone. You just fell for it. Your claim is that Obama knew Russia didn't do anything but that he directed the IC to make up evidence. That's entirely false. 

This is the sequence of events:
Did they hack us? Nope.
Did they run an influence campaign? Yep.
Okay, give me a report on that. 

Then why did they go after Flynn?

Its well established protocol that the incoming admin will establish contact with other nations...especially Russia. Not a new or unusual occurrence. 

So why? 

To plant a narrative...that's why.

In the end, even after they forced him to cop a plea, they had to reverse the decision.

Its rather plain. But you bought it.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Evidence:

 

 

Tweets are NOT EVIDENCE, FOOL

Anyone can LIE (and do) in a tweet.

Just like with FOS LIES, you believe whatever serves your AGENDA. LMAO

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Then why did they go after Flynn?

Its well established protocol that the incoming admin will establish contact with other nations...especially Russia. Not a new or unusual occurrence. 

So why? 

To plant a narrative...that's why.

In the end, even after they forced him to cop a plea, they had to reverse the decision.

Its rather plain. But you bought it.

They "went after" Flynn not for the fact of the meetings, but because he lied to the FBI about what he discussed in those meetings--substantially and materially lied. Actively undermining a sitting president's foreign policy is not a good look, but lying about it to the FBI is criminal. And, frankly, unbelievably stupid. Any person competent to hold Flynn's job would have KNOWN that those calls are monitored and that it was pointless to lie about them. 

He was also taking money from Turkey and operating as an unregistered foreign agent. 

For some reason, you people want to make Flynn out to be a victim. He's not. Just another crooked Trump crony.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

They "went after" Flynn not for the fact of the meetings, but because he lied to the FBI about what he discussed in those meetings--substantially and materially lied. Actively undermining a sitting president's foreign policy is not a good look, but lying about it to the FBI is criminal. And, frankly, unbelievably stupid. Any person competent to hold Flynn's job would have KNOWN that those calls are monitored and that it was pointless to lie about them. 

He was also taking money from Turkey and operating as an unregistered foreign agent. 

For some reason, you people want to make Flynn out to be a victim. He's not. Just another crooked Trump crony.

Well...

"In a court filing first reported by the Associated Press, the justice department said it moved to dismiss the charges "after a considered review of all the facts and circumstances of this case, including newly discovered and disclosed information".

 

The department said the interview between investigators and Flynn in January 2017 was "unjustified" and not conducted on a "legitimate investigative basis".

 

It also said it could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that Flynn had lied, and said that after the interview, FBI agents had "expressed uncertainty as to whether Mr Flynn had lied"."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52584193

It looks like Flynn was setup by overly zealous FBI agent and agency.

This is not new...

 

[gatomontes99]

5 hours ago, robosmith said:

Tweets are NOT EVIDENCE, FOOL

Anyone can LIE (and do) in a tweet.

Just like with FOS LIES, you believe whatever serves your AGENDA. LMAO

Your assessment is your OPINION and not FACT.