[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

COVID-19 - miamizsun - Nov 25, 2020 - 5:47am
 
2020 Elections - miamizsun - Nov 25, 2020 - 5:37am
 
Things You Thought Today - Coaxial - Nov 25, 2020 - 5:30am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Nov 25, 2020 - 5:27am
 
Next life I'm going to be a black girl backup singer - miamizsun - Nov 25, 2020 - 5:06am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - sirdroseph - Nov 25, 2020 - 5:02am
 
2001; A SPACE ODYSSEY - R_P - Nov 24, 2020 - 10:26pm
 
Democratic Party - kurtster - Nov 24, 2020 - 10:05pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Nov 24, 2020 - 5:01pm
 
Trump - R_P - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:40pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:05pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Nov 24, 2020 - 3:18pm
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - Manbird - Nov 24, 2020 - 3:11pm
 
want to donate but only use the native internet currency ... - westslope - Nov 24, 2020 - 2:56pm
 
Canada - westslope - Nov 24, 2020 - 2:52pm
 
Donating with Bitcoin - why not? - BillG - Nov 24, 2020 - 2:32pm
 
New Music - chris13 - Nov 24, 2020 - 1:56pm
 
Need A Thread Killed? - oldviolin - Nov 24, 2020 - 9:17am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - perruca - Nov 24, 2020 - 6:14am
 
Zappa - miamizsun - Nov 24, 2020 - 5:46am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:58am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:53am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - miamizsun - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:40am
 
Blues Rock - Ohmsen - Nov 24, 2020 - 3:00am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Nov 23, 2020 - 6:41pm
 
In My Room - buddy - Nov 23, 2020 - 5:57pm
 
Oops! - Red_Dragon - Nov 23, 2020 - 3:58pm
 
Republican Party - R_P - Nov 23, 2020 - 2:27pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - miamizsun - Nov 23, 2020 - 2:15pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Nov 23, 2020 - 1:44pm
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - haresfur - Nov 23, 2020 - 1:27pm
 
Name My Disease! - buddy - Nov 23, 2020 - 12:58pm
 
songs that ROCK! - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 23, 2020 - 11:49am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Nov 23, 2020 - 11:49am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 23, 2020 - 9:36am
 
No Points for Trying - miamizsun - Nov 23, 2020 - 6:56am
 
Amazing animals! - Coaxial - Nov 23, 2020 - 6:08am
 
Joe Biden - Steely_D - Nov 22, 2020 - 4:37pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Antigone - Nov 22, 2020 - 2:40pm
 
Always great listening... - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 22, 2020 - 2:10pm
 
What makes you smile? - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 12:53pm
 
Prog Rockers Anonymous - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 12:14pm
 
russian mystery - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 11:12am
 
Health Care - Steely_D - Nov 22, 2020 - 10:24am
 
You might be getting old if...... - Antigone - Nov 22, 2020 - 9:31am
 
Back to the 70's - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 8:51am
 
Outstanding Covers - sirdroseph - Nov 22, 2020 - 5:52am
 
Capital Punishment - R_P - Nov 21, 2020 - 4:11pm
 
THE SMITHS (THE BAND GOOD) - MORRISSEY (BAD) Discuss - sirdroseph - Nov 21, 2020 - 12:29pm
 
Play the Blues - sirdroseph - Nov 21, 2020 - 12:22pm
 
Republican Lies, Deceit and Hypocrisy - buddy - Nov 21, 2020 - 11:23am
 
Trump Lies - buddy - Nov 21, 2020 - 10:30am
 
Electronic Pest Control Devices - Do They Work? - miamizsun - Nov 21, 2020 - 10:01am
 
Great guitar faces - Red_Dragon - Nov 21, 2020 - 9:30am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - miamizsun - Nov 21, 2020 - 9:08am
 
A motivational quote - rhahl - Nov 21, 2020 - 7:54am
 
Dissociative Identity Disorder? - Ohmsen - Nov 21, 2020 - 4:52am
 
Amazing music to include - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 20, 2020 - 5:48pm
 
honk if you think manbird and OV are one and the same ent... - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 20, 2020 - 5:45pm
 
donation other than online? - BillG - Nov 20, 2020 - 12:50pm
 
Way Cool Video - miamizsun - Nov 20, 2020 - 11:07am
 
Guns - westslope - Nov 20, 2020 - 9:47am
 
Fado - Gs95045 - Nov 20, 2020 - 8:48am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - haresfur - Nov 20, 2020 - 1:45am
 
KarmaKarma Sweepstakes - kcar - Nov 19, 2020 - 9:25pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - Nov 19, 2020 - 2:56pm
 
manbird's shoe size and earwax content - oldviolin - Nov 19, 2020 - 2:44pm
 
"Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a (Republican) Virt... - buddy - Nov 19, 2020 - 1:23pm
 
Maarjamaa - oldviolin - Nov 19, 2020 - 12:24pm
 
Astronomy! - Red_Dragon - Nov 19, 2020 - 10:02am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Nov 19, 2020 - 9:17am
 
For anybody who's always wanted a Humpback Whale Skeleton - oldviolin - Nov 19, 2020 - 8:27am
 
The war on funk is over! - Ohmsen - Nov 19, 2020 - 7:44am
 
Environment - oldviolin - Nov 19, 2020 - 7:33am
 
Those Lovable Policemen - Ohmsen - Nov 19, 2020 - 7:25am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » 2020 Elections Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 90, 91, 92  Next
Post to this Topic
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 25, 2020 - 5:37am

 Red_Dragon wrote:
Are over.
 

agreed

they've been over

team orange can't put the shit back into the horse on this one

and finally they aren't nearly as important as the media wants us to believe
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Nov 25, 2020 - 5:32am

Are over.
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 25, 2020 - 4:43am



 kurtster wrote:
You have been trying to limit the discussion to only court challenges. It is more than that yet you refuse to acknowledge that.

I have said in no uncertain terms that Biden is the apparent winner. What part of that statement is unclear ?
 
Kurt...I think part of the disconnect/frustration is the continued use of modifiers.

Biden isn't the apparent winner...he's THE winner.  Sure, you can respond with a technicality and point to the electoral college and the future, but the reality is that it's over.  Trump lost.

The issue that the Right keeps dangling with the Trump supporters is counting "legal" votes.  Of course, everyone wants only legal votes, but the Right's use of the modifier is meant to suggest that there are thousands and thousands of illegal votes.  That's just not true.  There is no proof, there is no evidence, and the stupidity shown by Rudy & Co. in attempting to "prove" anything is embarrassing.

It's time to stop parsing language.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 25, 2020 - 12:01am

 steeler wrote:


 kurtster wrote:
Yes by your evasion of answering the question posed to you.

You're right about your professional acumen as I did not bring it up other than to say I would not judge you on that. I felt it necessary to say that so as to direct my thoughts based upon your partisanship only.

Your political partisanship has been well demonstrated over the years, to me. Enough so for me to make my statement.

That you deflect from recognizing your partisan tendencies is also telling. Or at least enough confirmation bias for me to work with ...

It is the way of your party to intentionally pass bad laws that are so bad that they are designed to end up in court so that they need resolution. It is a war of attrition. People cannot afford to challenge these laws or the courts are so overwhelmed that so much time passes as to make the plaintiff give up and go away. And these bad laws stand, much more often than not. Your party intentionally abuses the courts with these bad laws.
 

I evaded nothing. Again, I will match my forthrightness against yours and feel confident.

My political partisanship has been well demonstrated here and casts doubt upon the veracity of my posts, but yours does not? That one is a rhetorical question. 

We have been talking about Trump election challenges in court. Your last paragraph is not only off topic, it is not worth a response. It seems more and more clear to me, though, that you more than willing to discount the multitude of court dismissals of the Trump election challenges.

Your hero lost. He cannot accept it and neither can you

 
You have been trying to limit the discussion to only court challenges.  It is more than that yet you refuse to acknowledge that.

I have said in no uncertain terms that Biden is the apparent winner.  What part of that statement is unclear ?

You are putting words in my mouth, as usual.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 11:45pm



 kurtster wrote:
Yes by your evasion of answering the question posed to you.

You're right about your professional acumen as I did not bring it up other than to say I would not judge you on that. I felt it necessary to say that so as to direct my thoughts based upon your partisanship only.

Your political partisanship has been well demonstrated over the years, to me. Enough so for me to make my statement.

That you deflect from recognizing your partisan tendencies is also telling. Or at least enough confirmation bias for me to work with ...

It is the way of your party to intentionally pass bad laws that are so bad that they are designed to end up in court so that they need resolution. It is a war of attrition. People cannot afford to challenge these laws or the courts are so overwhelmed that so much time passes as to make the plaintiff give up and go away. And these bad laws stand, much more often than not. Your party intentionally abuses the courts with these bad laws.
 

I evaded nothing. Again, I will match my forthrightness against yours and feel confident.

My political partisanship has been well demonstrated here and casts doubt upon the veracity of my posts, but yours does not? That one is a rhetorical question. 

We have been talking about Trump election challenges in court. Your last paragraph is not only off topic, it is not worth a response. It seems more and more clear to me, though, that you more than willing to discount the multitude of court dismissals of the Trump election challenges.

Your hero lost. He cannot accept it and neither can you. 

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 11:34pm

From Politico online tonight, by Tim Alberta:

”More than any policy enacted or court vacancy filled, Trump’s legacy will be his unprecedented assault on the legitimacy of the ballot box. And it will not be considered in isolation. Future iterations of the GOP will make casual insinuations of voter fraud central to the party’s brand. The next generation of Republicans will have learned how to sow doubts about election integrity in one breath and in the next breath bemoan the nation’s lack of faith in our elections, creating a self-perpetuating justification to cast suspicion on a process that by raw numbers does not appear conducive to keeping them in power.”
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 11:10pm

 steeler wrote:


 kurtster wrote:

There are legislative investigations at the state level or will be underway for example such as the one in MI.  It is not just the courts.

I know that it is hard for you to think beyond only court proceedings as mattering in this.  Such is your conditioning based on your partisanship.  Not your profession.

The federal elections are governed by the Constitution and the individual legislatures of each state, IIRC.
 
You are the one who first talked about my being against Trump having his “day in court.” I was clarifying that you were not just waiting for the outcome of court challenges.

You know nothing about my “conditioning”  nor my professional acumen. And I do not need you to instruct me on the Constitution nor the electoral process.

You are out of bounds with your ad hominems. Telling.

 
Yes by your evasion of answering the question posed to you.

You're right about your professional acumen as I did not bring it up other than to say I would not judge you on that.  I felt it necessary to say that so as to direct my thoughts based upon your partisanship only.

Your political partisanship has been well demonstrated over the years, to me.  Enough so for me to make my statement.

That you deflect from recognizing your partisan tendencies is also telling.  Or at least enough confirmation bias for me to work with ...

It is the way of your party to intentionally pass bad laws that are so bad that they are designed to end up in court so that they need resolution.  It is a war of attrition.  People cannot afford to challenge these laws or the courts are so overwhelmed that so much time passes as to make the plaintiff give up and go away.  And these bad laws stand, much more often than not.  Your party intentionally abuses the courts with these bad laws.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 10:55pm



 Lazy8 wrote:
steeler wrote:
Trump has said that allowing the GSA to proceed with the transition was not a concession on his part. And he continues to talk about massive fraud. 

I asked whether you would acknowledge Biden won legitimately if Trump’s legal challenges were to fail. You answer that you will wait until it all plays out. What other than the outcome of the court challenges needs to play out?

Hunter Biden could still confess that it was he—he!—who voted 7 million times under assumed identities in 5 states.

You can't put it past him, he's a master of disguise. And time travel.
 
Indeed!

I think the key is that server in Ukraine.

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 10:51pm



 kurtster wrote:

There are legislative investigations at the state level or will be underway for example such as the one in MI.  It is not just the courts.

I know that it is hard for you to think beyond only court proceedings as mattering in this.  Such is your conditioning based on your partisanship.  Not your profession.

The federal elections are governed by the Constitution and the individual legislatures of each state, IIRC.
 
You are the one who first talked about my being against Trump having his “day in court.” I was clarifying that you were not just waiting for the outcome of court challenges.

You know nothing about my “conditioning”  nor my professional acumen. And I do not need you to instruct me on the Constitution nor the electoral process.

You are out of bounds with your ad hominems. Telling.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 10:41pm

 steeler wrote:


 kurtster wrote:
Trump has already made a de facto concession by allowing the GSA to begin a formal power transition.

I will say that as it stands right now, Biden is the apparent winner.

I will wait until it all plays out. I will reserve any judgment until then. That is my answer.
 

Trump has said that allowing the GSA to proceed with the transition was not a concession on his part. And he continues to talk about massive fraud. 

I asked whether you would acknowledge Biden won legitimately if Trump’s legal challenges were to fail. You answer that you will wait until it all plays out. What other than the outcome of the court challenges needs to play out?
 
There are legislative investigations at the state level or will be underway for example such as the one in MI.  It is not just the courts.

I know that it is hard for you to think beyond only court proceedings as mattering in this.  Such is your conditioning based on your partisanship.  Not your profession.

The federal elections are governed by the Constitution and the individual legislatures of each state, IIRC.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 10:39pm

steeler wrote:
Trump has said that allowing the GSA to proceed with the transition was not a concession on his part. And he continues to talk about massive fraud. 

I asked whether you would acknowledge Biden won legitimately if Trump’s legal challenges were to fail. You answer that you will wait until it all plays out. What other than the outcome of the court challenges needs to play out?

Hunter Biden could still confess that it was he—he!—who voted 7 million times under assumed identities in 5 states.

You can't put it past him, he's a master of disguise. And time travel.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 10:27pm



 kurtster wrote:
Trump has already made a de facto concession by allowing the GSA to begin a formal power transition.

I will say that as it stands right now, Biden is the apparent winner.

I will wait until it all plays out. I will reserve any judgment until then. That is my answer.
 

Trump has said that allowing the GSA to proceed with the transition was not a concession on his part. And he continues to talk about massive fraud. 

I asked whether you would acknowledge Biden won legitimately if Trump’s legal challenges were to fail. You answer that you will wait until it all plays out. What other than the outcome of the court challenges needs to play out?
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 10:15pm

 steeler wrote:


 kurtster wrote:
You did not answer the question, which is why you are so opposed to any investigations in alleged voting irregularities. Why is this so hard to answer ?

But I'm going to assign answer B to you based upon your response so far.

Trump just won two cases that will advance. One in Pa and one in Mi
 

I am not against investigations of alleged voting irregularities.

Here, you have Trump declaring there has been massive fraud across several states orchestrated by Democrats and that Biden could not possibly have beaten him without it. There has been no evidence of that — massive fraud across several states, all orchestrated by the Democrats. What they are doing is cobbling together allegations of various irregularities across several battleground states that they contend should lead to the conclusion that there was this massive fraud. Most of their legal challenges are not about fraud at all. The PA case you cited, as Islander pointed out, has nothing to do with fraud nor will it affect the outcome. (I am not aware of a Michigan case that Trump just won). There are voting irregularities in pretty much every election. They are not all worth challenging in court. Certainly states can conduct investigations into allegations of voting irregularities in the aftermath of an election even if the outcome would not be changed with an eye toward making future corrections.

Trump, however, should concede

unless he has legal challenges that, if sustained, would change the outcome. Certainly he should concede once his legal challenges have been decided and the outcome remains a Biden victory. As I previously stated, I do not expect him to do that. Nor do I expect that many of his supporters will do so.

You have not answered whether you would acknowledge that Biden won if these court challenges are denied.

 
Trump has already made a de facto concession by allowing the GSA to begin a formal power transition.

I will say that as it stands right now, Biden is the apparent winner.

I will wait until it all plays out.  I will reserve any judgment until then. That is my answer. 
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 9:57pm



 kurtster wrote:
You did not answer the question, which is why you are so opposed to any investigations in alleged voting irregularities. Why is this so hard to answer ?

But I'm going to assign answer B to you based upon your response so far.

Trump just won two cases that will advance. One in Pa and one in Mi
 

I am not against investigations of alleged voting irregularities per se

Here, you have Trump declaring there has been massive fraud across several states orchestrated by Democrats and that Biden could not possibly have beaten him without it. There has been no evidence of that — massive fraud across several states, all orchestrated by the Democrats. 

What they are doing is cobbling together allegations of various irregularities across several battleground states that they contend should lead to the conclusion that there was this massive fraud. Most of their legal challenges are not about fraud at all. The PA case you cited, as Islander pointed out, has nothing to do with fraud nor will it affect the outcome. (I am not aware of a Michigan case that Trump just won).

There are voting irregularities in pretty much every election. They are not all worth challenging in court. Certainly states can conduct investigations into allegations of voting irregularities in the aftermath of an election even if the outcome would not be changed with an eye toward making future corrections. Trump, however, should concede unless he has legal challenges that, if sustained, would change the outcome. Certainly he should concede once his legal challenges have been decided and the outcome remains a Biden victory. As I previously stated, I do not expect him to do that. What would that tell us? Nor do I expect that many of his supporters will do so. You have not answered whether you would acknowledge that Biden won if these court challenges are denied.



kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 9:21pm


Kurt, if you're experiencing deja vu all over again, that's not surprising. Some supporters of HRC claimed that Russian had "hacked" the 2016 election, implying that the Russians had changed vote counts in favor of Trump. As you pointed out, there were no successful attempts to do so in 2016.  And you condemned HRC supporters who couldn't get over the fact that Trump had won. 

Shoe's on the other foot, bud. Time for you to move on. 
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 9:17pm



 kurtster wrote:

So I will assign answer B to you as well.
 

In other words, 

"B) The margin of victory of Biden is so great there is no need to investigate any charges of fraud, misconduct or tampering with voting machines in this election"


You might try reading the newspapers more (and skipping Rush if you're watching him. Here, let me help you. There have been investigations into claims of "fraud, misconduct or tampering with voting machines in this election." Little to nothing has shown up. 


The Times Called Officials in Every State: No Evidence of Voter Fraud

The president and his allies have baselessly claimed that rampant voter fraud stole victory from him. Officials contacted by The Times said that there were no irregularities that affected the outcome.



Backstory: We investigated claims of voter fraud in the election. Here's what we found.

Nicole Carroll. USA TODAY

I'm USA TODAY editor-in-chief Nicole Carroll, and this is The Backstory, insights into our biggest stories of the week. If you'd like to get The Backstory in your inbox every week, sign up here.

As President Donald Trump continues to contest the election results, one of the most common questions I get is, "Are you investigating his allegations of voter fraud?" The short answer is yes, we will always look into credible accusations of serious wrongdoing.

The issue here is that many of these allegations are unfounded, overblown or have little or unreliable evidence.

"Reporters on my team have reviewed about 10 lawsuits alleging problems with voting and counting in several states," said enterprise editor Steve Myers. "What many people may not realize is how far the lawsuits fall short of what people claim."

For example, Myers said, in Nevada the Trump campaign announced it and the state Republican Party were preparing to file a lawsuit alleging that up to 10,000 people who no longer lived in Nevada had voted there.

"When the suit was filed, it contained just one vague reference to 'over 3,000 instances of ineligible individuals casting ballots,' and it cited no evidence," he said. The head of elections in Clark County said he would look into the allegation but that out-of-state voters are common, and often include members of the military and college students. Judges declined to stop vote counting.

The lack of evidence appears to be why judges have tossed these cases so quickly – in Georgia, it took just one day.



EXPLAINER: Trump’s challenges fail to prove election fraud

By NOMAAN MERCHANT and ALANNA DURKIN RICHERNovember 11, 2020

A barrage of lawsuits and investigations led by President Donald Trump’s campaign and allies has not come close to proving a multi-state failure that would call into question his loss to President-elect Joe Biden.

The campaign has filed at least 17 lawsuits in various state and federal courts. Most make similar claims that have not been proven to have affected any votes, including allegations that Trump election observers didn’t have the access they sought or that mail-in ballots were fraudulently cast.

Below, the AP examines Republican efforts to fight the vote tally in six states that Biden won or is leading:




Justice Dept. meets Trump, Giuliani vote-fraud claims with silent skepticism

By Devlin Barrett and Matt Zapotosky

November 21, 2020 at 12:17 p.m. EST

The Justice Department has met President Trump’s fantastical claims of widespread voter fraud with two weeks of skeptical silence, not taking any overt moves to investigate what Trump’s lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, claims is a globe-spanning conspiracy to steal the election.

Such deafening silence from one of the government’s main enforcers of election law indicates just how little evidence there is to support the wild, wide-ranging claims made by Trump and his supporters, most notably Giuliani in a Thursday news conference held inside the Republican National Committee headquarters.

Privately, Justice Department officials have said they are willing to investigate legitimate claims of vote fraud; Attorney General William P. Barr even loosened some restrictions that might otherwise have discouraged prosecutors from doing so before results are certified.

But current and former officials said they thought Giuliani’s accusations sounded “crazy,” and they have not seen or heard of any evidence suggesting large-scale fraud, let alone the kind of ­intercontinental conspiracy described by the president’s lawyer. Like others, they spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a politically sensitive matter.




Top DHS official ratchets up rebukes of Trump's false election claims

By Alex Marquardt, Geneva Sands and Zachary Cohen, CNN



Washington (CNN)

The Trump administration official in charge of helping states secure their elections has ramped up his efforts to reject the false claims coming from President Donald Trump and his supporters to the point that he's telling associates he expects to be fired.

On Thursday, Chris Krebs, who runs the cyber arm of the Department of Homeland Security, re-tweeted an elections expert calling on people to ignore "wild and baseless claims...even if they're made by the president." It wasn't his own tweet, but it was a notable rebuke of Trump from within his own administration as the President refuses to concede the race to President-elect Joe Biden.

An hour later, Krebs' agency, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, released a statement along with state and private election officials that was its most blunt rejection of the President's claims to date: "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," they wrote in a statement, with the line bolded for emphasis.

On Saturday night, Krebs slapped down another claim, tweeting, "Quick Election Security Disinfo Debunker: election-related servers WERE NOT recently seized in Europe by the US Army contrary to #disinfo rapidly spreading across social media. Don't buy it & think 2x before you share."
    In the lead-up to the election, Krebs had often quietly disputed the President's repeated false claims about mail-in ballots but went out of his way to not get drawn into criticizing his boss for spreading lies. But in the days that have followed the election, Krebs has adopted a more forceful approach regularly posted on Twitter — often with blaring red siren emojis — fact checks of the claims and conspiracy theories being pushed by Trump, his allies and supporters around the country.


    Related article: Election officials, including federal government, contradict Trump's voter-fraud conspiracy theories


    One conspiracy theory that has taken root online about a CIA supercomputer that changed Trump votes to Biden was dubbed a "hoax" and "nonsense" by Krebs, who linked back to CISA's "Rumor Control" page where they've been swatting away persistent false claims.

    "This is not a real thing, don't fall for it," Krebs wrote. By then it had already been mentioned on the Fox program hosted by Trump supporter Lou Dobbs, and would appear again on Fox & Friends, which the President regularly calls into, shortly thereafter.

    On Thursday, Trump went after a technology firm, Dominion Voting Systems, in an all-caps tweet that said in Pennsylvania they "SWITCHED 435,000 VOTES FROM TRUMP TO BIDEN." The day before, Krebs highlighted the Rumor Control post that stated: "Every state has voting system safeguards to ensure each ballot cast in the election can be correctly counted."

    Krebs was quick to respond when the President posted a video of election workers picking up ballots from a drop box in Los Angeles the day after voting ended with a message that questioned the legality: "Is this what our country has come to?

    Krebs then tweeted LA County's response to the President, that what the video showed was in fact perfectly legal. The drop box was locked the night before and the ballots were being picked up.




    Election 2020: Debunking false and misleading videos claiming to show voter fraud

    We fact check some of the false videos circulating on about the election count.

    By Fergal Gallagher,Catherine Sanz, andLena Camilletti

    November 13, 2020, 4:01 AM• 10 min read


    While many have acknowledged that former Vice President Joe Biden is the winner of the 2020 presidential election, projected to win more than the required 270 electoral votes, President Donald Trump and his allies are continuing to sow doubt about the results, despite not having evidence to the contrary and significant vote deficits in multiple crucial states.

    The president, who trails Biden by more than 5 million votes, has long made baseless claims about this and other elections being rigged. In the wake of Election Day, his supporters have pointed to multiple videos purporting to be proof of malfeasance in the electoral process.

    Many of these have been shared by Trump, his family and supporters. ABC News’ team of visual verification experts have been investigating several of these videos and debunked a number of the most prominent, which are described below.

    Some videos are completely manufactured, while others are real videos of genuine counting that has been taken out of context to try to imply some sort of wrongdoing. So far, ABC News has not found any evidence of widespread election fraud.

    All of the videos described below have either been removed from social media or marked as misleading...


    kurtster

    kurtster Avatar

    Location: where fear is not a virtue
    Gender: Male


    Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 9:04pm

     islander wrote:


     kurtster wrote:

    So I will assign answer B to you as well.
     

    whatever, I'm with Steeler.

     
    of course you are.
    islander

    islander Avatar

    Location: Seattle
    Gender: Male


    Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 8:56pm



     kurtster wrote:

    So I will assign answer B to you as well.
     



    whatever, I'm with Steeler.

    kurtster

    kurtster Avatar

    Location: where fear is not a virtue
    Gender: Male


    Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 8:37pm

     islander wrote:


     kurtster wrote:

    But I'm going to assign answer B to you based upon your response so far.

    Trump just won two cases that will advance. One in Pa and one in Mi.

     

    The case he won in PA deals with the deadline and a small number of votes (less than 10K) that have already be segregated and are not included in the tally that his Biden ahead by ~ 60K votes. So yes he won, but no it won't make any difference to the outcome. 

    Further, it has nothing to do with this alleged massive conspiracy of fraud you keep claiming. 
     
    So I will assign answer B to you as well.
    islander

    islander Avatar

    Location: Seattle
    Gender: Male


    Posted: Nov 24, 2020 - 8:27pm



     kurtster wrote:



    But I'm going to assign answer B to you based upon your response so far.

    Trump just won two cases that will advance. One in Pa and one in Mi.

     

    The case he won in PA deals with the deadline and a small number of votes (less than 10K) that have already be segregated and are not included in the tally that his Biden ahead by ~ 60K votes. So yes he won, but no it won't make any difference to the outcome. 

    Further, it has nothing to do with this alleged massive conspiracy of fraud you keep claiming. 


    Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 90, 91, 92  Next