@AdvanceManExtraordinaire and I'm telling you: court rulings.

What would proof look like to you?

> Is it possible for votes to be counted illegally and for the justice system to not rule in such a way to acknowledge that?
@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Yes.

Anyway, first time in this chat that no nice and polite discussion is to be had.

Im signing of. Night night guys

Brad raffesbberger is a republican @andrasol

Sounds like it’s not a very good way to determine the truth, no?

Thanks! That does make it interesting.

Can we agree , that whoever wanted lesser sign. Checks... is a bad person?

Math experts investigated the cities where they claimed benfords law displayed fraud. GOP propagandists said ignore the data in these cities in 2020 look at these other elections. That proves fraud in the cities we ignored.

No, cities are to small. When looking at state data it works out

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire That's not how the burden of proof works. We don't start with the accusation and then have to prove it wrong, particularly when there have been so many that were laughable on their face. The desperation has evolved.

Then the other elections they looked at 🤣 were exact examples similar to where they said it should work

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire that’s the task of the accuser to figure that out. So far everything that has been put forth are either common place or completely explainable.

Wait ill get you a link.

But again, nnon of this is proof, and anybody pro or contra benfords law will show it his way.

But this guy goed moat in depth, and has his data there to fact check him

Are these legislators at the hearing both republicans and democrats?

He just displayed it as proof in Arizona

this chat is turning into a left wing echo chamber that has very little basis in reality @here

You just said that it’s possible for courts to rule in a way that does not acknowledge ballots were illegally counted, even if they were.

thanks for pinging everyone

@andrasol we can only agree that this is something that was gonna happen if Trump lost , planned months in advance . We can also agree that most if these things people complain about are GOP initiated. So far this big show is a failure

Maybe you should do better than saying nuh uh and calling people you disagree with idiots spears

Meaning-Court rolling does not equal truth

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire correct. If the case isn't proven.

-.-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7S1-OCHqd8&feature=youtu.be

If anyone can prove this guy to be incorrect... you get acces to the datasheet

Let me know

benfords law only applies to certain distributions

I've proved this here before

Now im of. Good night guys

So let me reframe the question. If ballots were illegally counted, and the court doesn’t acknowledge this, is it possible that ballots were illegally counted?

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire, you just advanced to level 3!

Gn

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire no I said what is technically illegal, for example the PA lawsuit that got thrown out over a constitutional technicality is not proof or evidence of fraud. It’s proof that the GOP never completed administrative process

Yes, ive watched many claim te same. This is way more in depth though and tackles the debunkers claims

you cant just debunk a mathematical law after an election when our own officials had been using it to identify fraud before our own election

Let me know if you debunk this guy. I will happily change my view

It's not debunking the math law its showing how it was poorly applied

Which this guy talks about.

Ok, I’m simply asking what specially you would have to see to be convinced that ballots were illegally counted. It could be a witness testimony, mathematical evidence, etc. you name it.

Nobody said benfords law doesnt work when it should work. They said the claims going around Republican social media are not sets of numbers or should work and heres why

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire Yes. It is also possible that aliens counted them, regardless of whether anyone makes that claim. It isn't 'Everything allegation is true until proven wrong.' Not for me. You asked. I answered.