Message from @james j
Discord ID: 785662918628343828
But they were told to continue counting after they realized they could @Recalibar
While the poll watchers and media were sent home, breaking the law.
Radcliffe? That political hack? LOL yeah ok
Also interesting how she counted the same stack four times.
Do you have evidence they didn't? There's sworn testimony suggesting the PWs were told to leave. There's circumstantial evidence that corroborates their testimony. You don't see anything like that from the other side..
And if you think I'm going to give serious consideration to a guy who asserts one thing happened, and then later recants his assertion vis a vis having not even looked at the evidence, then... You're wrong.
@DrSammyD because the counting part met the legal requirements to keep going
According to the 2018 EO, Trump is using his word to issue action against foreign actors. It's an important factor.
What was the legal requirements. Citation needed.
@Recalibar they were not sent home (poll watchers). They thought the show was over because they sent a majority of the workers home
there is none ... only complaint is that the poll watchers may have been misled ... but the remedy need not be to throw out ballots
The remedy is to allow for a signature match on those ballots. And to publish the scans of those ballots.
Are you seriously asking me to prove a negative? You do understand that is not how any of this works.
You are making the affirmative claim "X did Y, in violation of P".... as such you need to provide evidence. The burden of proof is on those making the affirmative claim "saying something did happen"
Blah blah blah, it's a rhetorical question, my dude. Richard Barron needs to give testimony under oath. Until that happens, it's all impossible to say one way or the other.
If one dead voter is disenfranchised that's massive.
assuming those ballots were mail-in ... but those ballots are separated from the signatures now ... so now what?
Ruby Freeman and her daughter need to give testimony under oath, as well.
@jfindley typically people don’t write affidavits unless they were told to by lawyer. Or they want to pursue some legal Avenue. Most these poll workers just want to do their job and go home. They aren’t driven to push a issue. There is a signed affidavit from the other side
Im not sure what you are trying to establish. CISA was the agency under Homeland Security tasked with protecting our election (and many other things) from cyber attack. In a joint statement with other agencies they stated that it was the most secure election in American history. Now, I think that language is too colorful... but the point is... they found nothing.
I would be for publishing scans of ballots ... assuming it could be done with keeping the ballots secret
A majority, including the media, and the poll watchers. In the video, there were 7 people on staff. Four counters, 3 for oversight. Maybe you can reason there's a dem and rep poll watcher and one election official, but I'm partial to those three likely being elections officials given the affidavits, and the fact that a stack of ballots were counted three times in succession.
You use the video to verify the affidavits.
I mean, that's what we're looking at, isn't it? There can be NO FAITH in our election system as it stands.
I dont even know who that is....
Let me know if I am wrong...
You are asserting that poll workers told some Republican Poll Watchers to leave... either by ordering them to do so or telling them that all the counting was done for the night.
That is an affirmative claim. I am simply asking what is your evidence to support that?
@Recalibar they weren’t counted three times. When a ballot jams you redo the batch (per mellisa carone) and if they were put through twice it would have seen in the 2 hand counts
@jfindley that’s a seed planted in the mind of many even before the election started. Now everyone sees fraud where there isn’t. Did you watch what I linked?
Yeah... Melissa is saying that she saw around 30,000 ballots counted multiple times. So even if the were ran just two more times than they should have been there would be 60,000 additional votes than ballots requested or submitted.
That simply didnt happen.
Maybe she did, but the whole thing is shady. That Democrat woman was pretty adamant about explaining how the video was "debunked" claiming the media had already discredited the affidavits before it even came out. It was the first time the video was ever seen. How could she know that? I'm partial to believing that she wouldn't have, but that was the party narritive to deny that fraud happened.
I'm gonna have to pause on wasting my time with you for a bit. I mean, I like this conversation, but if you don't even know who Ruby Freeman and her daughter are, then you're painfully ignorant of the facts in this case in GA, and probably the rest, too. I love you, guy, and I wish the best for you and everyone else, but my willingness to carry on this remedial degree of conversation is waning. I apologize, but I've got more important things to argue about with random strangers on the internet.
@Recalibar because they had a investigator watch hours of the video due to these nonsense accusations. Everything was done by law
People were there
It was debunked.... look at the link that @james j provided. A news crew sat in on a frame by frame explanation of that video.
A false narrative is easily dismissed @Recalibar
Where is the bathroom footage?
You can clearly see a woman, stand in front of the room. She leans back, as if shes about to start speaking to a group of people. She stands there for a moment, moving her arms. She goes out of frame. Shortly after, election workers/cutters leave, they’re done. Counters start to leave, packing things up, and its claimed thats how those ballots got there, under the table. They stop packing up. The observers leave. They wait. And then moments after everyone is out, they begin counting again. Phone calls or no phone calls to officials, this was wrong. Very wrong.
One day they will make election officials pee on tape for the people @busillis
LOL... yeah ok. Says the guy wanting people to prove a negative. That is ignorant as to how logic works.
Where were the official monitors during this act, though? Can you point them out? Can the media at least identify those workers and settle people's minds? I skipped to the part of the video where they discuss "frame by frame" but they also fail to address how she counted the same ballots multiple times. Why would they not be proactive about that observation if that's what was going on, and they truly reviewed the video?
@em yes a 20 second video of some vague thing (again people pre primed to believe anything they see is fraud) thinking they saw fraud is not evidence. It’s a fantasy that people come up with due to confirmation bias
I mean the ballots are anonymous once out of the envelope.