Mike Lindell is offering $5 million to anyone who can disprove his allegations of voter fraud

[el midgetron]

I think Linbell’s challenge is specifically to do with disproving the authenticity of the data packets.

Quote

A $5,000,000 prize will be offered to any attendee who can prove that this cyber data is not valid data from the November 2020 election

 

[RavenHawk]

24 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

My point being you can't really disprove things. You can only prove them.

Actually, you can disprove things.  That is the basis of science.  This is one of my favorites:

Quote

 

Yes, you can disprove a negative in at least two ways.

1) You can directly disprove a negative by proving something else.

For example, how can we disprove the statement "There is no planet orbiting the sun exactly opposite earth's orbit."

Well, you could fly a spaceship there and look at it.

2) But another way can also be used to disprove a negative.

If the statement is false, and there really is a hidden planet on the other side of the sun, then the effects of such a planet would be present. For example, the orbits of other planets would be perturbed. If they are perturbed, there must be a body there, and the negative is disproved.

 

The data from AZ and GA clearly shows wide-spread fraud.  That's not the problem.  It's getting authorities to serious look at it without dismissing it out-of-hand.  There is a huge lack of curiosity in proving or even disproving the allegation.  That in itself raises red flags.

[Vorg]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

He probably has the data from at least AZ and GA.

I wonder what kind of data? Packets from China by the terabytes may show they were on the servers, but it won't show what they were doing, in a hypothetical that is.

Or do they actually have evidence the machine flipped votes and can 100% prove it?

I really am concerned that Cyber Ninjas wanted the "routers" and Mike Lindell's proof is internet data. Something stinks in Denmark.

[RavenHawk]

1 minute ago, South Alabam said:

I wonder what kind of data? Packets from China by the terabytes may show they were on the servers, but it won't show what they were doing, in a hypothetical that is.

Or do they actually have evidence the machine flipped votes and can 100% prove it?

I really am concerned that Cyber Ninjas wanted the "routers" and Mike Lindell's proof is internet data. Something stinks in Denmark.

There is at least one web site that has the data on it.  This site is put up by hard core number crunchers.  I don't have the link (I am trying to recall where it might be??), but I'm sure it will come out eventually.  These number crunchers analyzed the ballots.  They show (by counties) what results in a county with no to little fraud looks like and what one with major fraud looks like.  I'd like to see this done on all 3143 counties in the country.  Other data shows duplicate ballots and numbers of registered voters don't match votes cast.  There are also photo's of unfolded ballots.  Maybe you wouldn't consider any one of these as nothing more than an anomaly, but here, the anomaly is the rule and not the exception.  In fact, if there was a motto of the 2020 election, it would be "Anomalies Rule!"

[Vorg]

2 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

There is at least one web site that has the data on it.  This site is put up by hard core number crunchers.  I don't have the link (I am trying to recall where it might be??), but I'm sure it will come out eventually.  These number crunchers analyzed the ballots.  They show (by counties) what results in a county with no to little fraud looks like and what one with major fraud looks like.  I'd like to see this done on all 3143 counties in the country.  Other data shows duplicate ballots and numbers of registered voters don't match votes cast.  There are also photo's of unfolded ballots.  Maybe you wouldn't consider any one of these as nothing more than an anomaly, but here, the anomaly is the rule and not the exception.  In fact, if there was a motto of the 2020 election, it would be "Anomalies Rule!"

We'll see for sure, in a week or so.

[Tatetopa]

14 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

The thing that is confusing to me personally is what purpose beyond their relevancy an be achieved by this?

There is a pattern here.

Phone call from Trump and follow up from Rudy to Ukraine:  "You don't have to start an investigation on Biden, just say you are."

Trump to DOJ, "You don't have to prove it is corrupt, just say it is and we will handle the rest."

They are not interested in proof.  They are interested in  causing doubt.  Trump can work with doubt and get his base energized over it.  

Same with Arizona, don't need to end it with results, just imply you may find all sorts of irregularities and keep people ready  to riot and send in money.

Donald Trump is not as delusional as some people think.  He knows the value of propaganda and disinformation.   He is pumping his brand to loyal customers, raking in dough and hopes he will wind up as leader after the next insurrection.   

16 hours ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Well if Lindell has the kind of information that is irrefutable then expect to find him dead with a pillow over his face.

Doesn't matter if Lindell has information or not.  For  Trump, he is expendable.  If he could have Lindell offed and blame the Democrats and Deep State,  it might even help his cause, and alleviate the need to  produce any evidence at all.  I hope you are wrong Buzz.  Lindell may be a nutcase, but he does not deserve to die 

[Likely Guy]

1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

There is at least one web site that has the data on it.  This site is put up by hard core number crunchers.  I don't have the link (I am trying to recall where it might be??),

You famously don't provide links, so why even bother to mention it?

[RavenHawk]

9 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

You famously don't provide links, so why even bother to mention it?

Well, I'm not as anal as you.  This is an opinion board.  I've always played by a gentleman's agreement.  It is your integrity to share to the best of your ability that information is as accurate as possible.  If you have a link, great, but what makes a link more authoritative than the individual?  One person's reputable source is another's garbage source.  For what it matter's, I am looking for that link.  It is in a youtube clip (it may no longer be there any more).  If I find it, I'll be glad to shove, er share it.

[Likely Guy]

2 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Well, I'm not as anal as you.  This is an opinion board.  I've always played by a gentleman's agreement.  It is your integrity to share to the best of your ability that information is as accurate as possible.  If you have a link, great, but what makes a link more authoritative than the individual?  One person's reputable source is another's garbage source.  For what it matter's, I am looking for that link.  It is in a youtube clip (it may no longer be there any more).  If I find it, I'll be glad to shove, er share it.

Very 'gentlemanly' of you.

[Likely Guy]

18 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

It is your integrity to share to the best of your ability that information is as accurate as possible.  If you have a link, great, but what makes a link more authoritative than the individual?

If it's a valid, well thought out, fact checked, edited piece from a well thought of, respected source; of course it's more valid than one person's opinion.
 

Edit: "I researched it on the internet but will provide no sources", just doesn't cut it.

Edited August 5, 2021 by Likely Guy

[Vorg]

Trump: "There was no voter fraud, I made it up." "Give me the 5 mill."

Lindell: "Doh!!"

 

[Tatetopa]

3 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

The data from AZ and GA clearly shows wide-spread fraud.  That's not the problem.  It's getting authorities to serious look at it without dismissing it out-of-hand.  There is a huge lack of curiosity in proving or even disproving the allegation.  That in itself raises red flags.

Where is this clearly shown?  Georgia did 3 audits and even Republicans found nothing. 

[Autochthon1990]

How much longer before these cultists get they where taken? At least the heavens gate people only run a website instead of raiding the capitol in Buffalo outfits 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

1 hour ago, Autochthon1990 said:

How much longer before these cultists get they where taken? At least the heavens gate people only run a website instead of raiding the capitol in Buffalo outfits 

Hmmm..... dude you do know that all the Heaven’s Gaters are dead, right? It’s a little crass to use them to score a point.

[Essan]

Has anyone checked for fraud in the States that returned a majority in favour of Frump  

[Autochthon1990]

6 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Hmmm..... dude you do know that all the Heaven’s Gaters are dead, right? It’s a little crass to use them to score a point.

There's two left. They keep the website running. And it's apt since a lot of trumpists are dying of covid these days because their cult won't let them get vaccinated 

[RavenHawk]

11 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

If it's a valid,

Why wouldn’t it be valid?  You require someone else to tell you what to think or can you weigh the information on its own merits?

 

well thought out, fact checked, edited piece from a well thought of, respected source; of course it's more valid than one person's opinion.

And in the end, that source is just someone else’s opinion.  Doesn’t matter how respected they are.  To put more weight on the reputation of the person rather than the material is dangerous.

 

A respected researcher could run an experiment and post those results here.  And that would be fine, as that info is objective data.  But the minute they put a conclusion on it, it becomes just their opinion.  Another equally respected scientist can look at the same data and draw a completely opposite conclusion.  Both conclusions being valid.

 

Edit: "I researched it on the internet but will provide no sources", just doesn't cut it.

Has it ever dawned on you that “sources” are opinion too?  Are you too lazy to go research on your own?  If I have any question about someone’s comments, I go research it myself.  I don’t wait for them or anyone else to tell me how to think.

 

[Michelle]

1 hour ago, Autochthon1990 said:

And it's apt since a lot of trumpists are dying of covid these days because their cult won't let them get vaccinated 

I didn't know so many Blacks and Hispanics were trumpists.

Latest Data on COVID-19 Vaccinations by Race/Ethnicity

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-race-ethnicity/

[RavenHawk]

13 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Where is this clearly shown?  Georgia did 3 audits and even Republicans found nothing. 

Republicans were presenting the evidence in a state hearing.  It’s not that hard to look for it.  Just need to google the GA Senate election hearings in December (I think?).  There have been posts on this forum covering GA.  There is one guy there that is running the effort in AZ too.  He might be looking at other states by now.  All the data he works off is publicly available.  I don’t recall his name but once I find that, I can also find the AZ results.  But don’t wait for me, look on your own.  But if I find it, I will post it.  It is eye opening.

 

[Vorg]

6 hours ago, Essan said:

Has anyone checked for fraud in the States that returned a majority in favour of Frump  

There was no fraud in states that Trump won, no matter how close the percentage points. (According to Former President Trump )

But all the fraud was committed in States that had low percentage point wins for Biden.

Those clearly became targets for claiming fraud due to the narrow wins, IMO.

Margin of Victory | Elections 2020 | Fox News

[Tatetopa]

7 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Republicans were presenting the evidence in a state hearing.  It’s not that hard to look for it. 

Thanks.  I did look it up.  There are about 5 hours of recordings, I watched about 20 minutes and checked a couple of other  sources.

I am not going to apologize for being anal, I got paid well to be anal about making aerospace components for 30 years.  It's a habit now.

Politics is not like engineering. Politics shares a lot more with our threads on aliens, the paranormal, and Bigfoot.   It is some first hand observation plus a lot of extrapolation and reliance on opinion and belief. 

Judicial proceedings on the other hand are a lot more like engineering.  They rely on evidence than can be investigated and observed by multiple people then cross examined.  Witnesses as well, even though they swear an oath to tell the truth, are cross examined.  The judge is supposed to maintain adherence to established law.   Lawyers from both sides have a hand in selecting a jury that is deemed impartial to the best of their abilities.   It is a system I can understand and place some trust that most of the time it gets things right.  One goal of the Constitution  is to make it the same for all cases based on law and not personality and not to display preference.

I will momentarily skip back to the first Adam Schiff hearing and the Mueller report.   because you have some definite feelings about those.  The Schiff Committee like the GOP Georgia Committee  is based in politics and not rules of evidence.  What is called "evidence" in both examples did not see the scrutiny from both sides that a court could provide.  Also who testifies and who does not in a committee hearing can shape the story and is controlled by th ecommittee chairman.  It is not an impartial search for truth..

Mueller's procedure was different.  He did not find reason to charge Trump, but a number of his associates were charged with specific infractions.  Evidence was presented in court and cross examined.  Some charges were dropped because they did not hold up to examination and some led to convictions.

I have no confidence that Democrats or Republicans can leave bias behind and reveal truth in committee hearings or that they even try to do so.  

I still believe our judicial system although not perfect is as good as it gets in this world.  If charges are presented and make their way to court, I will be interested to follow the procedure. Until then, I view election fraud claims as little different than Bigfoot claims.  Supply some evidence that can be cross examined and is definitive, then you got something.

 

 

[Doug1066]

Republicans have had something like 60 opportunities to present evidence of fraud in court AND FAILED EVERY TIME.  This is a dead horse.  Let's quit whipping it.

Doug

[Vorg]

2 hours ago, Doug1066 said:

Republicans have had something like 60 opportunities to present evidence of fraud in court AND FAILED EVERY TIME.  This is a dead horse.  Let's quit whipping it.

Doug

Trump is the one that keeps it going. 

His own DOJ told him there was no fraud - Bill Barr is replaced weeks away from Biden's tenure because he refuses to say there was election fraud, and we have seen the attempt to pressure the new DOJ to "Just say there was fraud"

Mitch McConnel said something like, Every election has some fraud, and this one was no different, but nothing that would have changed the outcome. And Naturally Trump is against Mitch McConnel now.

Over 60 suits have been rejected by courts. Courts that are ran by evidence and procedure, not conspiracy theories, of which several lawyers have been disbarred by a few states and some lawyers have been censured.

He even lashed out at the Supreme court because they refused to overturn the election in his favor.

 

Several states have done recount after recount, and the results are the same. Yet Trump cronies in battleground states want "audits" like that occurring in Arizona.

And we see the "audit" in Arizona. So far nothing has come out of it that wasn't immediately explained, yet, Trump added these explained or debunked falsities to his continued fraud lies. 

Any doubt sowed in Arizona was fuel for other battleground states to begin their own audits and the DOJ has warned these states that these audits might violate Federal law.

 

State with low win margins for Biden had massive fraud (according to Trump)

Yet states he won had no fraud whatsoever, even if the win margin was slim. (According to Trump)       https://www.foxnews.com/elections/2020/general-results/margin-of-victory

Trump lost GA by 11,700 votes, and he tried to pressure GA Secretary of State (R) Raffensperger to investigate claims of fraud citing he had "won the state"

Raffensperger refused because Trump in fact, had not won the state. And Trump, naturally and in typical fashion attacked him, and it may cost him in next May's primary.

 

People could say I have TDS, but I don't. Everything I have written above is factual. Trump keeps this going.

 

 

 

[RavenHawk]

4 hours ago, Doug1066 said:

Republicans have had something like 60 opportunities to present evidence of fraud in court AND FAILED EVERY TIME.  This is a dead horse.  Let's quit whipping it.

Doug

If you want to remain ignorant then it is only a dead horse.  Just accept what Big Brother tells you and obey.  Have you ever been curious as to why out of 60 opportunities (I thought it more but I won’t argue), they’ve been shot down 60 times?  Even going off odds, just one should have made it through.  The reason why is not on the merit of evidence but the case was dismissed on some procedural issue.  No court has examined the evidence.  The security of our elections are on the line.  These cases should have been heard just to keep things transparent.  The MSM and Big Tech have been successful at keeping the people ignorant of the facts.  Each charge should have been followed up on.  This should have been a test on the system to build confidence in it. 

 

[Essan]

Let's face it: Frump failed to win gold because he was too woke.  No other explanation!

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-06/donald-trump-uswnt-megan-rapinoe-woke-leftis-maniacs-tokyo-olymp/100355344