Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Massive Voter Fraud


Cookie Monster
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, ian hacktorp said:

And now Missouri has joined with Texas and Louisiana.  This is becoming a tsunami that will wipe out corrupt elections, and Democrat power, for decades to come:

Missouri Joins Texas Taking The Election Fight to Supreme Court

https://saraacarter.com/missouri-joins-texas-taking-the-election-fight-to-supreme-court/

Multiple states joining the movement.  I guess the corrupt leadership figured they'd shove this down our throats and no one would do anything.  If there was ANY way for SCOTUS to avoid this cup, they would.  I hope they're willing to give the evidence a fair viewing and then punt it back to the U.S. House of Representatives.  IMO, anyone who took part in planning or executing this operation should be imprisoned for life or put against a wall.  THIS cannot happen again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Youtube just announced yesterday they will remove videos criticizing the Election results immediately and on January 20th will issue strikes to creators which lead to permanent bans.

Meanwhile Texas yesterday sued the 4 swing states and 8 other states joined the lawsuit....

But... Hey you're not allowed to talk about that on their platform!

We're living in a simulation!

:D

Edited by President-Elect Acidhead
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, President-Elect Acidhead said:

But... Hey you're not allowed to talk about that on their platform!

Fortunately, there are options now other than the Leftist/Marxist corporate owners.  Parler and Rumble come to mind.  Trying to crush dissent has NEVER been effective, long term.  It just leads to huge amounts of animosity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, President-Elect Acidhead said:

Youtube just announced yesterday they will remove videos criticizing the Election results immediately and on January 20th will issue strikes to creators which lead to permanent bans.

Meanwhile Texas yesterday sued the 4 swing states and 8 other states joined the lawsuit....

But... Hey you're not allowed to talk about that on their platform!

We're living in a simulation!

:D

Wow.  So you can't talk about the questionable election results even though it's currently in court?  YouTube needs to be regulated seriously. Possibly broken up as a monopoly.  They have so much power over peoples ability to exercise free speech that they may effectively be a utility.  Same with facebook, twitter and google.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, President-Elect Acidhead said:

Youtube just announced yesterday they will remove videos criticizing the Election results immediately and on January 20th will issue strikes to creators which lead to permanent bans.

Meanwhile Texas yesterday sued the 4 swing states and 8 other states joined the lawsuit....

But... Hey you're not allowed to talk about that on their platform!

We're living in a simulation!

:D

That pretty ridiculous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, and then said:

Multiple states joining the movement.  I guess the corrupt leadership figured they'd shove this down our throats and no one would do anything.  If there was ANY way for SCOTUS to avoid this cup, they would.  I hope they're willing to give the evidence a fair viewing and then punt it back to the U.S. House of Representatives.  IMO, anyone who took part in planning or executing this operation should be imprisoned for life or put against a wall.  THIS cannot happen again.

One state suing another is automatically to the Supreme Court.

As it includes the swing states not sticking to legal votes it will be heard. And then they bring in the other evidence to show widespread corruption.

4 more years!!! *SNIP*

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

One state suing another is automatically to the Supreme Court.

As it includes the swing states not sticking to legal votes it will be heard. And then they bring in the other evidence to show widespread corruption.

4 more years!!! and the lethal injection for Biden!!!

so and if Trump looses, does he get that punishment of yours?

Edited by godnodog
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ian hacktorp said:

I believe the problem lies with those states whose governors arbitrarily changed the voting laws to accommodate late ballots.

Apparently, the US Constitution clearly places such authority with state legislatures, NOT governors.

I honestly don't think your angle that "it must be OK because nobody complained before the election" will hold much, if any, water.

But, like spartan max2 said, we won't have long to wait for an answer.

Ballots that arrived after election day were set aside.  It wasn't even close to the vote difference within the state.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Ballots that arrived after election day were set aside.  It wasn't even close to the vote difference within the state.  

When this is all sorted out, Trump will be proven to have legitimately won by the largest margin in history...both popular AND electoral.

Oh, btw...there are now 17 states that have joined the Texas lawsuit.

It's a runaway freight train...best stay out of the way.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

Ballots that arrived after election day were set aside.  It wasn't even close to the vote difference within the state.  

The argument isn't separated out by state.  Now that FOUR states are being evaluated, the outcome is "determinative".  Those four states have one big item in common... they used unconstitutional means to change the time, place or manner of election and that is clearly against the Constitution.  Add to that the fact that in EVERY CASE in those states, actions were taken that blatantly treated some votes unequally than others.  Ask Gore how SCOTUS dealt with that little issue in 2000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, RAyMO said:

the Dems did nothing, the court cases prove this. The SC will probably ditch all cases - because they have seen the evidence presented and also know there is no fraud.  

Yeah, nah... what a difference a day makes, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, and then said:

The argument isn't separated out by state.  Now that FOUR states are being evaluated, the outcome is "determinative".  Those four states have one big item in common... they used unconstitutional means to change the time, place or manner of election and that is clearly against the Constitution.  Add to that the fact that in EVERY CASE in those states, actions were taken that blatantly treated some votes unequally than others.  Ask Gore how SCOTUS dealt with that little issue in 2000.

You're actually wrong.  What unconstitutional means?  You see, what your news sources aren't telling you is that universal main in voting was a BIPARTISAN BILL passed in PA in 2019.  How, exactly is that unconstitutional?  Now, all of the sudden, state Republicans are trying to say it's unconstitutional because Trump lost?  Sorry bro..don't work that way.  Here is an article from October 2019...

Quote

Governor Wolf made voting more convenient and secure by signing Act 77 of 2019, the most significant improvement to Pennsylvania’s elections in more than 80 years. The bipartisan compromise legislation takes effect for the April 2020 primary election and makes Pennsylvania a national leader with voter-friendly election reforms.

https://www.governor.pa.gov/newsroom/governor-wolf-signs-election-reform-bill-including-new-mail-in-voting/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Agent0range said:

But, I still don't see what part of the constitution it violated, as many red states already have universal main in voting.  Shall we decertify Utah's election results?  How come they aren't included in the lawsuit?  Because the voted Trump?

IF the changes were executed by the judiciary instead of being voted in by the state legislature, they DID break the law.  Add to that the fact that a very clear precedent was reached in Gore V Bush in 2000 regarding EQUAL PROTECTION.  All four of those states treated their votes by different standards than the rest of the country.  Will the court rule against Trump?  Maybe.  If they do, though, they are going to have to do some SERIOUS backpedaling over their own precedent. 

Though unlikely, the very issue you are raising could lead SCOTUS to invalidate the entire election and send it to the House for a contingent election.  That would probably be the most equal way to handle it.  It would leave the decision in the hands of the "people's representatives"  and it would cause serious debate and change in our system so that this kind of bull shat never can happen again... :tu:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, President-Elect Acidhead said:

Youtube just announced yesterday they will remove videos criticizing the Election results immediately and on January 20th will issue strikes to creators which lead to permanent bans.

Meanwhile Texas yesterday sued the 4 swing states and 8 other states joined the lawsuit....

But... Hey you're not allowed to talk about that on their platform!

We're living in a simulation!

:D

That’s an utter bulls hit move from YouTube. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and then said:

Yeah, nah... what a difference a day makes, eh?

care to elaborate? not seeing anything new - if you are referring to Texan lawsuit led by a guy allegedly looking to get a pardon - I was aware of that. - it will be ditched. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and then said:

IF the changes were executed by the judiciary instead of being voted in by the state legislature, they DID break the law.  Add to that the fact that a very clear precedent was reached in Gore V Bush in 2000 regarding EQUAL PROTECTION.  All four of those states treated their votes by different standards than the rest of the country.  Will the court rule against Trump?  Maybe.  If they do, though, they are going to have to do some SERIOUS backpedaling over their own precedent. 

Nope...it was voted on.  

Quote

The state House of Representatives on Tuesday advanced the bill in a 138-61 vote. Later that day, the state Senate approved it in a 35-14 vote.

Also, Bush v Gore has nothing to do with the way different states treat their ballots.  It was specifically ruled on about recounts, and different counties within the state treating ballots differently.  There has to be EQUAL PROTECTION within the state.  States make their own election laws, and they must be applied uniformly throughout the state.  Some states don't verify signatures.  Some states have different recount rules.  Some states allow ballots to come in 7 days after election day if they are postmarked.  Some states allow same day voter registration.  Every state handles their ballots differently.  Also, I'm curious, how did Pennsylvania treat their votes different?  How did Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin treat their votes different?

https://patch.com/pennsylvania/newtown-pa/7-big-changes-voting-pa-just-signed-law

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, and then said:

The argument isn't separated out by state.  Now that FOUR states are being evaluated, the outcome is "determinative".  Those four states have one big item in common... they used unconstitutional means to change the time, place or manner of election and that is clearly against the Constitution.  Add to that the fact that in EVERY CASE in those states, actions were taken that blatantly treated some votes unequally than others.  Ask Gore how SCOTUS dealt with that little issue in 2000.

Interesting enough, Texas did the same thing: Hypocrisy of Texas AG election case – Severskiy - Science News

Texas’ Republican Gov. Gregg Abbott extended early voting by a week and expanded the period in which mail-in ballots could be hand-delivered. “Using his emergency authority because of the pandemic,” Glenn Smith, a Texas Democratic political consultant, told me, “our governor accomplished exactly what his attorney general is saying other states did, improperly. Nonsense. None of this harmed the presidential election. It helped turnout.”  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, President-Elect Acidhead said:

 

20201209_171334.jpg

I’d love to know why the fact that 17 states are putting a case/s to the SC is a disputed claim according to Twitter. Is it because it used the magic “auto dispute”word “fraud”?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I’d love to know why the fact that 17 states are putting a case/s to the SC is a disputed claim according to Twitter. Is it because it used the magic “auto dispute”word “fraud”?

Probably "greatest election fraud in history".

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I’d love to know why the fact that 17 states are putting a case/s to the SC is a disputed claim according to Twitter. Is it because it used the magic “auto dispute”word “fraud”?

Of course it is.  Because there was no fraud.  None of Trump's lawsuits even allege fraud.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Probably "greatest election fraud in history".

OHH that bit. 
Yes, I can see why thst might be a bit “iffy” on the whole “election fraud claims” front ;)

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

OHH that bit. 
Yes, I can see why thst might be a bit “iffy” on the whole “election fraud claims” front ;)

If Trumps knows something.  And so many organisations under executive control are in on it - CIA, FBI, USPS, CBP, et al - maybe this is the greatest frameup in history.

Somebody left the totally legitimate counting software in the machines in GA, PA, WI, and MI.  All the vote swapping software was loaded into machines in Texas, Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

That's why Trump brought the economic might to blacklisted Venezuela.  To control the illegitimate ballot pipeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ian hacktorp said:

Oh, btw...there are now 17 states that have joined the Texas lawsuit.

Make that 18 states...Arizona just jumped on board.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Agent0range said:

Nope...it was voted on.  

Also, Bush v Gore has nothing to do with the way different states treat their ballots.  It was specifically ruled on about recounts, and different counties within the state treating ballots differently.  There has to be EQUAL PROTECTION within the state.  States make their own election laws, and they must be applied uniformly throughout the state.  Some states don't verify signatures.  Some states have different recount rules.  Some states allow ballots to come in 7 days after election day if they are postmarked.  Some states allow same day voter registration.  Every state handles their ballots differently.  Also, I'm curious, how did Pennsylvania treat their votes different?  How did Michigan, Georgia and Wisconsin treat their votes different?

https://patch.com/pennsylvania/newtown-pa/7-big-changes-voting-pa-just-signed-law

Act 77 is illegal in PA, no one is really arguing that it isnt besides you, what the courts are ruling is that the challenge coming after the election is too late.  The only way act 77 would be legal is if the PA constitution was amended which was started but stalled out around halfway through and was never finished so act 77 does violate the PA constitution and thus illegal.  In the mid term election in 2 years dont be expecting anymore no reason mail in ballots.

In another thread I already showed how not requiring signature matching for mail in ballots but in person ballots violated equal protection. 

Besides from that there was the ballot cureing issue, essentially in some counties any error in a mail in ballot caused it to be discarded outright, in some counties people were notified on election day of the issue and given the chance to fix it, and in other counties mail in ballots were checked as received and people given days or weeks notice to fix the issue.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.