Message from @LadyLuv2020๐ŸŒ…

Discord ID: 799159529472393219


2021-01-14 06:04:46 UTC  

Name one suit that had an actual hearing.

2021-01-14 06:05:16 UTC  

They avoided it so they won't have to rule on it.

2021-01-14 06:06:08 UTC  

Thatโ€™s certainly what Giuliani claimed isnโ€™t it

2021-01-14 06:06:34 UTC  

Good night gentlemen.

Claimed what?

2021-01-14 06:06:48 UTC  

@yetiCodes what do you think widespread means. Itโ€™s means significant rendering the election meaningless. We donโ€™t have evidence of this.

2021-01-14 06:06:53 UTC  

No judge would look at the evidence

2021-01-14 06:07:17 UTC  

There really wasn't... and there are plenty of cases that looked at actual evidence and none stood up to scrutiny...

You can watch the trial here:
https://www.ntd.com/programming-alert-live-coverage-of-voter-fraud-evidence-by-trump-campaign-at-nevada-court-hearing_535682.html

You can read the ruling here:
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/nevada/nevada-judge-tosses-trump-campaigns-election-challenge-2203811/

2021-01-14 06:07:45 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/771201221145919499/799157793667678248/Screenshot_20210113-225814_Brave_20210113220736.jpg

2021-01-14 06:07:53 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/771201221145919499/799157828203839518/Screenshot_20210113-213308_Samsung_Internet.jpg

2021-01-14 06:07:59 UTC  

So weird.

2021-01-14 06:08:04 UTC  

I bookmarked it and will look I to the case tomorrow. :)

2021-01-14 06:08:05 UTC  

@LadyLuv2020๐ŸŒ…, you just advanced to level 2!

2021-01-14 06:08:13 UTC  

When a judge says Iโ€™ve looked at your evidence and itโ€™s speculative meritless drivel not based on any compelling legal argument so thereโ€™s not a point to continuing they are viewing your evidence. They just arenโ€™t so easily fooled ๐Ÿ˜‚

2021-01-14 06:09:32 UTC  

Although my favorite judge would certainly be the one the told Rudy and Jenna they shouldnโ€™t be practicing law ๐Ÿฟ

2021-01-14 06:09:57 UTC  

Also depends on the political leanings of the judge and political pressure. But I haven't read it yet, and dont know what was claimed with in it

2021-01-14 06:10:39 UTC  

A wide variety of Trump appointed judges said Id like some evidence but you are giving me none

2021-01-14 06:11:31 UTC  

Have you honestly sat through and watched the hearings? That is what I have based my opinion thus far.

2021-01-14 06:12:02 UTC  

Yes they can get away with far more when not under oath when their testimony conflicts with their affidavit

2021-01-14 06:12:03 UTC  

And not news reels. The entire thing.

2021-01-14 06:13:23 UTC  

They signed affidavits this was not some Senate or house show boating and listening to themselves give speeches.

2021-01-14 06:14:39 UTC  

I am not here to argue anyway. I just have listened to all of the hearings in every state present evidence they had hoping for a day in court.

2021-01-14 06:15:04 UTC  

I would give more credit to showboating politicians. Signing affidavits doesnโ€™t mean much. Especially when testimony doesnโ€™t match the affidavit. But even the โ€œexpertsโ€ caught committing perjury arenโ€™t facing changes let alone random scrubs.

2021-01-14 06:15:58 UTC  

Tell me which ones didn't match and post the affidavit.

2021-01-14 06:16:31 UTC  

I dont have Twitter but I will look into that one tomorrow too

2021-01-14 06:16:38 UTC  

Good night. :(

2021-01-14 06:16:43 UTC  

:)

2021-01-14 06:16:44 UTC  

Mellissa Carones wasnโ€™t even remotely close

2021-01-14 06:17:07 UTC  

She certainly made a fuss about signing something that made it illegal to lie ๐Ÿ˜‚

2021-01-14 06:18:37 UTC  

When you are before state congress not under oath you can just say whatever doesnโ€™t remotely match your affidavit and thereโ€™s no repercussions

2021-01-14 06:19:13 UTC  

They tried to put them under oath in MI and they flipped out and said nope I need to be able to lie sir

2021-01-14 06:21:25 UTC  

Perhaps it's because the counties with minorities are also the ones with the highest populations? The lack of prosecution doesn't alleviate questions regarding these issues.

It's not surprising that heavily Democrat areas will vote Democrat, but that doesn't explain away every issue.

For example, in PA, it was expected that Democrats would have a higher % of the mail-ins, but that was because they requested the most absentee ballots. When you look at the numbers, Biden got 117% of the Democrat returned ballots. Ok, fine I suppose that's possible (non-Dems voting for Biden), but what does that actually look like. He would need 95% of the Dem vote, 21% of the Republican vote, and over 80% of the Independent vote. Or, he would need 100% of the Dem vote, 98% of Indep. vote and 2.3% of the Repub. vote (this presumes only Repubs voted for Trump). Wow, extremely impressive results. Let's not look into them. Also, I seem to remember a claim of batches totaling 570,000 votes for Biden vs 3,200 for Trump over a short period of time. I have yet to find a "debunk" for that one. Who knows.

They didn't have paper ballots for every state/county. In GA, the paper ballots are generated by the machine. So you're at the mercy of people's carelessness (which is egregious, for most people). That's what their "risk limiting audit" was, a recount of those print outs.

And when GA did do an absentee signature match audit, they didn't do it for the main county in question, Fulton LOL. In the words of the President-elect, "C'mon man!"

Once again, Trump didn't convince me that things were off. I, myself convinced me they were off because these irregularities stuck out to me. If Trump said from the beginning that there likely wasn't fraud, I wouldn't have believed him. Ok? lol

The media sways public opinion and judges are sensitive to that.

As a finance person, if the SEC doesn't trust your numbers, they're going to demand to see all your "facts" and no BS will stop them.

2021-01-14 06:27:32 UTC  

I don't think private investigators can gain access to the info they need, but maybe I'm wrong?

But does it matter? The video from the State Farm Arena which showed voting continuing after the observers went home was answered with a simple "They weren't told to go home, the counting process was legit. No fraud. Debunked. Bye."

Cool, ok.

2021-01-14 06:29:51 UTC  

What on earth is 117% of Democrat returned ballots? Whatever ballots were returned is 100% ๐Ÿ˜‚

2021-01-14 06:33:05 UTC  

In other words, if we presume he received 100% of the Democrat ballots returned, he also received an additional 17% of that number.

I worded that part weirdly, I'll admit.

2021-01-14 06:36:05 UTC  

I made a spreadsheet because I wanted to look into this more, but I couldn't find the data I needed.

2021-01-14 06:36:44 UTC  

PA provided a breakdown of mail-in ballots by registration, but they didn't do the same for in-person votes. I wanted to compare them.

2021-01-14 06:41:06 UTC  

There was a good number of GOP voters that showed up to vote Biden and the mailin ballots had a heavy lean towards Biden which is part was due to Trump voters not taking pandemic seriously

2021-01-14 06:44:58 UTC  

Perhaps. I don't see how the method of voting itself (irrespective of registration) would skew so heavily in one direction.

Many Republicans do take the pandemic seriously and many Republicans vote absentee in general. From my understanding, Republicans have always utilized absentee ballots in decent numbers. For this election it was supposed to favor Democrats because the numbers showed more Democrats requested them.

2021-01-14 06:46:16 UTC  

As I said last night, I usually vote absentee and did this time as well. Except this time I physically dropped my ballot off because I didn't trust my mailman lol.