Biden

[marks]

Who are the people "allowing" Biden to run? The DNC? Some unnamed power brokers who are holding the strings? I always thought it was the candidate's choice to run or not run.

Look at the parallels in other nations and ask youself, am I seeing something happening on a global scale?

Much love!

 

[RedFan]

The Democrats had the greatest "voter fraud organization in history," and they surely needed it. Every aspect of the electrical process has been carefully scrutinized for exploitation.

From dirty voter roles, sending unsolicited mailin ballots, vote harvesting, stuffing the box before, during, and after election day. Ditching ballots. Changing votes from military ballots. Shipping in pre-filled ballots from out of state. Machines manipulating tallies. Tabulating votes as floating point values. Machines rejecting a disproportinate amount of ballots, sending them for adjudication. Conflicts of interest in the selection of voting machine companies. Keeping observers far from the election workers. Kicking republican observers out of the Tabulating facilities. Blocking off windows in the Tabulating facilities. Overall poor oversight of the adjudication process. Sending people home then continuing to count into the night without oversight. Remote manipulation of tallied numbers in the vote database as observed live on air due to a connection to the media.

Then when the votes suddenly spiked for Biden there was nothing but obuscation. Ineffective audits were again done by machine. Rejected complaints about cheating due to no standing. Harassment of witnesses.

I probably didn't even list half the issues. Talk about undemocratic.

And you have evidence of all this? Where were you during the dozens of unsuccessful court challenges?

 

[lforrest]

And you have evidence of all this? Where were you during the dozens of unsuccessful court challenges?

If I brought these complaints forward they would be rejected on standing... Like they were for the real witnesses.

 

[Wick Stick]

I actually liked Bernie Sanders and Obama, mainly because they supported social health care...

Obama completely bungled socializing healthcare in America.

Rather than fixing prices for medical care (which we do for our elder healthcare program already) and/or having payment come from government (again, we already do this for the impoverished)...

Instead the legislation Obama put through requires everyone to PURCHASE THEIR OWN HEALTH INSURANCE, and the government sends subsidies directly to the insurance companies. Worse, not everyone qualifies - if your income is too high or too low you will rejected.

Effectively, our "socialized healthcare" turned into a cash-grab by the insurance companies. Our government now pays THEM, and the people are required by law to pay THEM as well.

It's not socialism.. it's the next step in capitalism... the government requiring people to buy from private companies.

 

[RedFan]

If I brought these complaints forward they would be rejected on standing... Like they were for the real witnesses.

So, you weren't a real witness to any of this. You are just buying into what others have said. That's not so much a "standing" problem as it is a hearsay problem. You can't testify due to lack of personal knowledge. (By the way, only a plaintiff needs to have standing to sue; the plaintiff's witnesses called at trial do not need standing in their own right.) Doesn't it give you the slightest pause that those "witnesses" (the ones who had more than conjecture and thus were permitted to testify based on personal knowledge) didn't persuade a single court?

And I am willing to bet that the people you have chosen to believe were not neutral, independent, unbiased, disinterested investigators of the facts, but rather Trump supporters. Why did you choose to believe them? Could it be because you supported the same outcome they did?

 

[lforrest]

So, you weren't a real witness to any of this. You are just buying into what others have said. That's not so much a "standing" problem as it is a hearsay problem. You can't testify due to lack of personal knowledge. (By the way, only a plaintiff needs to have standing to sue; the plaintiff's witnesses called at trial do not need standing in their own right.) Doesn't it give you the slightest pause that those "witnesses" (the ones who had more than conjecture and thus were permitted to testify based on personal knowledge) didn't persuade a single court?

And I am willing to bet that the people you have chosen to believe were not neutral, independent, unbiased, disinterested investigators of the facts, but rather Trump supporters. Why did you choose to believe them? Could it be because you supported the same outcome they did?

Whatever helps you sleep at night. When witnesses come forward at their own risk and are willing to submit their statements into evidence that may result in them being charged with perjury, they earn my ear. And I have not seen refutation for but one claim from the eye witnesses. Only unproven, generalized, adhominun attacks.

 

[RedFan]

Whatever helps you sleep at night. When witnesses come forward at their own risk and are willing to submit their statements into evidence that may result in them being charged with perjury, they earn my ear. And I have not seen refutation for but one claim from the eye witnesses. Only unproven, generalized, adhominun attacks.

Well, here is what we can do. Give me the names of the cases and the names of the eye witnesses whose testimony "earned your ear," as well as the approximate dates of their testimony, and I will procure the transcripts of their testimony at my own expense as well as any rebuttal testimony, so you and I can examine that testimony on this public forum, or any other public forum of your choosing. And if I am right that there is no "there" there, you can reimburse me. Deal?

By the way, witnesses whose testimony is disbelieved by a judge or jury rarely get charged with perjury. I've tried over a hundred cases in 43 years of practicing law, and haven't seen it happen once. (If it were otherwise, few witness would volunteer to testify and our judicial system would grind to a halt.)

 

[lforrest]

Well, here is what we can do. Give me the names of the cases and the names of the eye witnesses whose testimony "earned your ear," as well as the approximate dates of their testimony, and I will procure the transcripts of their testimony at my own expense as well as any rebuttal testimony, so you and I can examine that testimony on this public forum, or any other public forum of your choosing. And if I am right that there is no "there" there, you can reimburse me. Deal?

By the way, witnesses whose testimony is disbelieved by a judge or jury rarely get charged with perjury. I've tried over a hundred cases in 43 years of practicing law, and haven't seen it happen once. (If it were otherwise, few witness would volunteer to testify and our judicial system would grind to a halt.)

Whoever said they were given a chance to testify in court? Remember the cases were dismissed on standing, so evidence was not heard in court.

The statements were presented to state representatives for a month or two after the election. Some of which were sufficiently convinced that they sent alternate electors to Washington to be able to put in a vote for trump if fraud was proven. Perhaps there are still recordings of those.

 

[MrNoir]

The Democrats had the greatest "voter fraud organization in history," and they surely needed it. Every aspect of the electrical process has been carefully scrutinized for exploitation.

From dirty voter roles, sending unsolicited mailin ballots, vote harvesting, stuffing the box before, during, and after election day. Ditching ballots. Changing votes from military ballots. Shipping in pre-filled ballots from out of state. Machines manipulating tallies. Tabulating votes as floating point values. Machines rejecting a disproportinate amount of ballots, sending them for adjudication. Conflicts of interest in the selection of voting machine companies. Keeping observers far from the election workers. Kicking republican observers out of the Tabulating facilities. Blocking off windows in the Tabulating facilities. Overall poor oversight of the adjudication process. Sending people home then continuing to count into the night without oversight. Remote manipulation of tallied numbers in the vote database as observed live on air due to a connection to the media.

Then when the votes suddenly spiked for Biden there was nothing but obuscation. Ineffective audits were again done by machine. Rejected complaints about cheating due to no standing. Harassment of witnesses.

I probably didn't even list half the issues. Talk about undemocratic.

if by issues you mean lies from the right...then yeah you only covered about half of them

 

[MrNoir]

If I brought these complaints forward they would be rejected on standing... Like they were for the real witnesses.

Yeah right. At the end of the string of lawsuits filed by Trump 4 were dismissed as being without standing. The most famous of this was the conservative controlled Supreme Court rejected the bid from Texas attorney general to have the votes of five states just erased. Meanwhile over 60 cases were rejected for lack of evidence and it is interesting to note that 38 of these were ruled on by judges appointed by Trump himself. I'm sure he is still bewildered by the idea that people he put on the bench woudl choose to actually follow the law rather than take orders from him.

 

[dev553344]

It's not about age. It's about being evil and senile. I think Joe is both.

evil and senile, or senile or evil. I think both would be too much for old Joe. One should do just fine. Just fine!

 

[MrNoir]

Whatever helps you sleep at night. When witnesses come forward at their own risk and are willing to submit their statements into evidence that may result in them being charged with perjury, they earn my ear. And I have not seen refutation for but one claim from the eye witnesses. Only unproven, generalized, adhominun attacks.

what risks?
what perjury?

My Favorite "eyewitness" claim happened in a Michigan apelet court. Trumps lawyers brought forth the claim that a particular district was sorting and destroying ballots. THE judge asked if they had evidence of this and they said they had a sworn affidavit from a state election official. Judge asked for the document and looked at it. flipped it over...and back again and asked "what is this?" The lawyers told her it was the sworn affidavit. "This is a piece of paper with 3 post it notes on it." The lawyers got a lecture about just what an affidavit is and then the judge read the post it notes into the record. the notes are a written account of a state election official who, while at lunch heard from a person she did not know and never learned the name of that he had heard from an unknown source that one voting place was sorting and destroying ballots.

 

[lforrest]

what risks?
what perjury?

My Favorite "eyewitness" claim happened in a Michigan apelet court. Trumps lawyers brought forth the claim that a particular district was sorting and destroying ballots. THE judge asked if they had evidence of this and they said they had a sworn affidavit from a state election official. Judge asked for the document and looked at it. flipped it over...and back again and asked "what is this?" The lawyers told her it was the sworn affidavit. "This is a piece of paper with 3 post it notes on it." The lawyers got a lecture about just what an affidavit is and then the judge read the post it notes into the record. the notes are a written account of a state election official who, while at lunch heard from a person she did not know and never learned the name of that he had heard from an unknown source that one voting place was sorting and destroying ballots.

Not familiar with that court case but the hearings before the state legislatures had actual witnesses that were not giving hearsay statements.

And I do not consider you to be a reliable source either, due to how much you shill for the left on here.

 

[Cassandra]

Always the election fraud, and as always no evidence. People spread this stuff, when NO ONE has proven it, and yet it is done because trump.


Proverbs 26:20 - Where no wood is, there the fire goeth out: so where there is no talebearer, the strife ceaseth

 

[RedFan]

Not familiar with that court case but the hearings before the state legislatures had actual witnesses that were not giving hearsay statements.

And I do not consider you to be a reliable source either, due to how much you shill for the left on here.

One problem with hearings before state legislatures is the absence of the adversary's opportunity for cross examination, “beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” 5 Wigmore, Evidence §1367 (Chadborn Rev. 1974). In a court of law, testimony that cannot be cross examined would be stricken from the record.

 

[BlessedPeace]

Or more likely it is engrained to never take sides against the family.

She should have never put in writing what she would never want made public.

She has members in her family in the law that know that basic truth in the laws.

How many backflips can she do so to deny her responsibility in outting her pain?

Pedophiles survive in darkness and in intimidating their victims to remain silent.

Biden is gross with adult women too. Who missed that coverage?

 

[thelord's_pearl]

Yes the diary was hers. The pages containing the allegations of sexual abuse were according to the author of that diary was not hers.
"I don't know where those pages came from but it wasn't from my diary

@BlessedPeace, Well since she said this, we cannot tell if it's true or not. I mean, people can be desperate to ruin Biden's reputation as they were about the election so we do not know for sure, we can only guess. How was Biden gross with adults? I only heard on the news that time I was watching it and I heard that Trump was like that and that he made a comment about his daughter which sounded like he was attracted to her.

 

[BlessedPeace]

@BlessedPeace, Well since she said this, we cannot tell if it's true or not. I mean, people can be desperate to ruin Biden's reputation as they were about the election so we do not know for sure, we can only guess. How was Biden gross with adults? I only heard on the news that time I was watching it and I heard that Trump was like that and that he made a comment about his daughter which sounded like he was attracted to her.

You always have to get a dig in on Trump. No matter how bad Biden is,gotta get in an accusation against Trump.

Your TDS is a shame.
Your support for an open Traitor and Seditionist is deplorable.

 

[thelord's_pearl]

You always have to get a dig in on Trump. No matter how bad Biden is,gotta get in an accusation against Trump.

Your TDS is a shame.
Your support for an open Traitor and Seditionist is deplorable.

Not getting a dig, only heard Trump was like that. However, I wanted to know what you had to say about your comment that "Biden is gross with adults too" to see if I got anything possibly wrong, but didn't get any info to get to know about what I doubt. Anyway, I honestly only heard about Trump like that on the news and I think you should know too but somehow you don't say anything about Trump for some reason but only push the unlikelyhood of what Biden is. I was not very straightforward even about Trump but now I am going to say it. According to what I watched on the news, Trump is way worse than Biden in character. There I said it. "peace"

 

[BlessedPeace]

Not getting a dig, only heard Trump was like that. However, I wanted to know what you had to say about your comment that "Biden is gross with adults too" to see if I got anything possibly wrong, but didn't get any info to get to know about what I doubt. Anyway, I honestly only heard about Trump like that on the news and I think you should know too but somehow you don't say anything about Trump for some reason but only push the unlikelyhood of what Biden is. I was not very straightforward even about Trump but now I am going to say it. According to what I watched on the news, Trump is way worse than Biden in character. There I said it. "peace"

creepy uncle joe with women at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com