C@LAg said:

---

Troutslime said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Troutslime said:

---

Due process is only "dangerous " to communists.

---

Due process isn't claiming states and retweeting conspiracy theories. How is that due process? How is that not irresponsible AT BEST?

---

Do you even know what due process is?

---

Due = deux = two, in french
process = what is done to tea leaves

Two teas.

---

....your compatriot used the term. I simply am playing on his ground. I'm pretty sure we both know he's talking about the 'legal process'

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Just let it play out. You should want an open and honest and free election. I hope you are right that very bad actors didn't give a giant middle finger to the Americans on Election Day.

---

I would love to let it play out. If Trump simply stated "i want to re count this election over voter fraud concerns" (i'd still find it ridiculous, but not dangerous). The danger comes in when he tweets oout "I WON THE ELECTION" or "DOMINION RIGGED OUR ELECTION"...extremists in his base take that as gospel and it just invites open chaos.

---

Let the legal team present the case.

It sure as hell doesn't pass the smell test though. Every bit of logic says that Dems somehow rigged this thing. I don't know if they can prove it though.

Good to have you back though.

The quicker you ignore Hullaballo the better your life will be.

I promise.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Of all the voter fraud allegations, so far only 1 has been proven....and it was for Trump.

---

I assume you mean other than the admissions of law breaking in Pennsylvania to include opening mail in ballots before election day then coordinating with the PA Democrat Party to contact voters whose ballots weren't completed correctly both of which are state crimes, curing mail in ballots which is a state crime and back dating post marks which is a federal crime. Oh and let's not forget the unconstitutional change in the deadline to receive mail in ballots. Note I haven't even mentioned the widespread dead voters.

Look, if we're going to have a reasonable conversation here you're going to have to admit that there was a lot of fraud here. Was it enough to change the outcome, I don't know. But we're way beyond the point of knowing there were laws broken. There were. Accept that and we can go from there. Otherwise you're just a naive fool buying what your establishment masters want you to believe.

---

how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3? Just take a guess.

---

Your answer isn't at all relevant to my point. There was fraud, it's no longer a point for debate. Laws were broken. Can you admit that? If not I'll leave you to your own devices but I don't debate with people who can't agree to basic facts. I said in my post that we don't know if there was sufficient fraud to turn the election but we have to admit there was fraud in order to have an honest conversation about the nature of that fraud and to assess the impact. Right now the talking heads (and you) appear unwilling to even admit it happened. It did. We have admissions of it. Can you admit that? If not I'll exit the stage and you can continue to tell yourself that the number of postmarks on election day matters because there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome.

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Of all the voter fraud allegations, so far only 1 has been proven....and it was for Trump.

---

I assume you mean other than the admissions of law breaking in Pennsylvania to include opening mail in ballots before election day then coordinating with the PA Democrat Party to contact voters whose ballots weren't completed correctly both of which are state crimes, curing mail in ballots which is a state crime and back dating post marks which is a federal crime. Oh and let's not forget the unconstitutional change in the deadline to receive mail in ballots. Note I haven't even mentioned the widespread dead voters.

Look, if we're going to have a reasonable conversation here you're going to have to admit that there was a lot of fraud here. Was it enough to change the outcome, I don't know. But we're way beyond the point of knowing there were laws broken. There were. Accept that and we can go from there. Otherwise you're just a naive fool buying what your establishment masters want you to believe.

---

how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3? Just take a guess.

---

Your answer isn't at all relevant to my point. There was fraud, it's no longer a point for debate. Laws were broken. Can you admit that? If not I'll leave you to your own devices but I don't debate with people who can't agree to basic facts. I said in my post that we don't know if there was sufficient fraud to turn the election but we have to admit there was fraud in order to have an honest conversation about the nature of that fraud and to assess the impact. Right now the talking heads (and you) appear unwilling to even admit it happened. It did. We have admissions of it. Can you admit that? If not I'll exit the stage and you can continue to tell yourself that the number of postmarks on election day matters because there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome.

---

Are you talking about the "laws" that PA "broke" by having the state supreme court allow the counting of mail in ballots postmarked by 11/3? B/c that's precisely my point and is relevant.

I've already admitted there has been fraud...and it was a vote for Trump. Every other allegation has been procedural (basically republicans crying about how a single state handled a pandemic by actually catering to people's safety).

So if you want to cry about postmarked ballots received after 11/3, again i ask; how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3?

ScottishFire said:

---

The quicker you ignore Hullaballo the better your life will be.

I promise.

---

Something we agree on! Seriously, if you guys just ignored everyone who disagreed with you, this would be better for everyone. Just stay in your echo chamber.

People who say people shouldn't get their news from John Oliver, are probably the same people who get their news off YouTube or from Tucker Carleson and Laura Ingraham.

But literally no one gets their news from John Oliver, his viewers recognize it is entertainment.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Just let it play out. You should want an open and honest and free election. I hope you are right that very bad actors didn't give a giant middle finger to the Americans on Election Day.

---

I would love to let it play out. If Trump simply stated "i want to re count this election over voter fraud concerns" (i'd still find it ridiculous, but not dangerous). The danger comes in when he tweets oout "I WON THE ELECTION" or "DOMINION RIGGED OUR ELECTION"...extremists in his base take that as gospel and it just invites open chaos.

---

Voting for the party of BLM and Socialism... that is what is really dangerous. The only chaos is how much the dems/MSM are roadblocking/censoring and doing everything they can to push the narrative that the election is over and we should all give up and roll over. If what Trump said invited open chaos then why haven't we burned down our cities yet???

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Of all the voter fraud allegations, so far only 1 has been proven....and it was for Trump.

---

I assume you mean other than the admissions of law breaking in Pennsylvania to include opening mail in ballots before election day then coordinating with the PA Democrat Party to contact voters whose ballots weren't completed correctly both of which are state crimes, curing mail in ballots which is a state crime and back dating post marks which is a federal crime. Oh and let's not forget the unconstitutional change in the deadline to receive mail in ballots. Note I haven't even mentioned the widespread dead voters.

Look, if we're going to have a reasonable conversation here you're going to have to admit that there was a lot of fraud here. Was it enough to change the outcome, I don't know. But we're way beyond the point of knowing there were laws broken. There were. Accept that and we can go from there. Otherwise you're just a naive fool buying what your establishment masters want you to believe.

---

how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3? Just take a guess.

---

Your answer isn't at all relevant to my point. There was fraud, it's no longer a point for debate. Laws were broken. Can you admit that? If not I'll leave you to your own devices but I don't debate with people who can't agree to basic facts. I said in my post that we don't know if there was sufficient fraud to turn the election but we have to admit there was fraud in order to have an honest conversation about the nature of that fraud and to assess the impact. Right now the talking heads (and you) appear unwilling to even admit it happened. It did. We have admissions of it. Can you admit that? If not I'll exit the stage and you can continue to tell yourself that the number of postmarks on election day matters because there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome.

---

Are you talking about the "laws" that PA "broke" by having the state supreme court allow the counting of mail in ballots postmarked by 11/3? B/c that's precisely my point and is relevant.

I've already admitted there has been fraud...and it was a vote for Trump. Every other allegation has been procedural (basically republicans crying about how a single state handled a pandemic by actually catering to people's safety).

So if you want to cry about postmarked ballots received after 11/3, again i ask; how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3?

---

Since you went there the State Supreme Court backed a clearly unconstitutional change to state voting procedures so yes that does seem like it's illegal. The Constitution is extremely clear on who can change state voting laws and it's not a bureaucrat or the state supreme court. You can call it what you want but I call it unconstitutional. There is a process for changing the voting process in Pennsylvania and it's incredibly clear. Maybe where we disagree is in our respect for the law. I will never care about the number of ballots received after 11/3 until we agree as to whether they should be counted at all. Do you care about the Constitution and what it says about who is responsible for making changes to voting law? Answer than and we can go from there on this point.

But no that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the affidavits we have from Democrat voters who said they were contacted in the days before the election by the PA Democrat Party to cure their ballots that otherwise would not be counted. According to PA voting law mail in ballots cannot be opened before 0700 on election day so there's one broken law when those ballots were opened ahead of time. Then the state conspired with the Democrat Party to cure democrat ballots so there's two since curing ballots is also illegal in PA. of course they didn't reach out to Republicans whose ballots weren't correct so while most likely not illegal it certainly is unethical. Laws. Were. Broken. That's no longer up for debate.

While on the subject of PA we also have an affidavit from a postal worker saying he was instructed to backdate postmarks on ballots received after 11/3 so that they be counted. That's a federal felony, by the way. Again, Laws. Were. Broken.

We haven't even gotten to the fact that Smokin' Joe Frazier voted nine years after he died. That goes with the countless other dead people who voted. Again, Laws. Were. Broken.

You seem to want to argue the extent of the fraud and that's not a line I'm willing to cross. To be incredibly blunt "Just the tip" means we still got ****ed. Fraud is fraud. Voter fraud should be a death penalty offense. Is that extreme? Yes. So is undermining the republic for political power. If I'm misinterpreting your insistence that we focus on the number of ballots received after 11/3 then please explain.

Personally skeptical of mass voter fraud, but OP was terrible. They found a woman who had 174 fraudulent ballots.... IN MEXIA TEXAS!!! FREAKING MEXIA!!! If they can pull 174 ballots in a tiny town like that, who knows what they could do in the metro areas.

Again, I'm the person who needs absolute proof. I think this fight has the chance to tear our country apart, and I'm not real excited to get that going. But this John Oliver video was ******ed.

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

LOYAL AG said:

---

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

Of all the voter fraud allegations, so far only 1 has been proven....and it was for Trump.

---

I assume you mean other than the admissions of law breaking in Pennsylvania to include opening mail in ballots before election day then coordinating with the PA Democrat Party to contact voters whose ballots weren't completed correctly both of which are state crimes, curing mail in ballots which is a state crime and back dating post marks which is a federal crime. Oh and let's not forget the unconstitutional change in the deadline to receive mail in ballots. Note I haven't even mentioned the widespread dead voters.

Look, if we're going to have a reasonable conversation here you're going to have to admit that there was a lot of fraud here. Was it enough to change the outcome, I don't know. But we're way beyond the point of knowing there were laws broken. There were. Accept that and we can go from there. Otherwise you're just a naive fool buying what your establishment masters want you to believe.

---

how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3? Just take a guess.

---

Your answer isn't at all relevant to my point. There was fraud, it's no longer a point for debate. Laws were broken. Can you admit that? If not I'll leave you to your own devices but I don't debate with people who can't agree to basic facts. I said in my post that we don't know if there was sufficient fraud to turn the election but we have to admit there was fraud in order to have an honest conversation about the nature of that fraud and to assess the impact. Right now the talking heads (and you) appear unwilling to even admit it happened. It did. We have admissions of it. Can you admit that? If not I'll exit the stage and you can continue to tell yourself that the number of postmarks on election day matters because there wasn't enough fraud to change the outcome.

---

Are you talking about the "laws" that PA "broke" by having the state supreme court allow the counting of mail in ballots postmarked by 11/3? B/c that's precisely my point and is relevant.

I've already admitted there has been fraud...and it was a vote for Trump. Every other allegation has been procedural (basically republicans crying about how a single state handled a pandemic by actually catering to people's safety).

So if you want to cry about postmarked ballots received after 11/3, again i ask; how many ballots do you think were postmarked with 11/3?

---

Since you went there the State Supreme Court backed a clearly unconstitutional change to state voting procedures so yes that does seem like it's illegal. The Constitution is extremely clear on who can change state voting laws and it's not a bureaucrat or the state supreme court. You can call it what you want but I call it unconstitutional. There is a process for changing the voting process in Pennsylvania and it's incredibly clear. Maybe where we disagree is in our respect for the law. I will never care about the number of ballots received after 11/3 until we agree as to whether they should be counted at all. Do you care about the Constitution and what it says about who is responsible for making changes to voting law? Answer than and we can go from there on this point.

But no that isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the affidavits we have from Democrat voters who said they were contacted in the days before the election by the PA Democrat Party to cure their ballots that otherwise would not be counted. According to PA voting law mail in ballots cannot be opened before 0700 on election day so there's one broken law when those ballots were opened ahead of time. Then the state conspired with the Democrat Party to cure democrat ballots so there's two since curing ballots is also illegal in PA. of course they didn't reach out to Republicans whose ballots weren't correct so while most likely not illegal it certainly is unethical. Laws. Were. Broken. That's no longer up for debate.

While on the subject of PA we also have an affidavit from a postal worker saying he was instructed to backdate postmarks on ballots received after 11/3 so that they be counted. That's a federal felony, by the way. Again, Laws. Were. Broken.

We haven't even gotten to the fact that Smokin' Joe Frazier voted nine years after he died. That goes with the countless other dead people who voted. Again, Laws. Were. Broken.

You seem to want to argue the extent of the fraud and that's not a line I'm willing to cross. To be incredibly blunt "Just the tip" means we still got ****ed. Fraud is fraud. Voter fraud should be a death penalty offense. Is that extreme? Yes. So is undermining the republic for political power. If I'm misinterpreting your insistence that we focus on the number of ballots received after 11/3 then please explain.

---

wait wait wait...you're saying that legit votes were allowed and that should be illegal? Listen to yourselves. Mail in ballots can be "cured" based solely on the way ballot was enveloped. That has nothing to do with "counting" or "opening" ballots prior to the election (which btw is a BS rule enacted by republicans specifically to create this exact type of chaos. Dozens of states count early votes/ballots.) Republicans overwhelmingly voted in person (thus it's not surprising there was little 'curing' for them).

Also, your postal worker claimed to have overheard 2 people talking about backdating a single ballot. He never saw it. And then later recanted. And now is apparently sticking by his original story? Either way, guess how many ballots were postmarked with 11/3? It's still relevant to this "big scheme" you've conjoured.

JOE FRAZIER?! lmaoooo just google that BS man.

Bottom line; you're pretending to argue for based on semantics in order to peddle this BS that hundreds of thousands of fake votes were cast. It's pathetic.

AGNinBCS said:

---

People who say people shouldn't get their news from John Oliver, are probably the same people who get their news off YouTube or from Tucker Carleson and Laura Ingraham.

But literally no one gets their news from John Oliver, his viewers recognize it is entertainment.

---

The fact that you equate the two shows a ridiculous level of either ignorance or hyper partisanship.

Quote:

---

wait wait wait...you're saying that legit votes were allowed and that should be illegal? Listen to yourselves. Mail in ballots can be "cured" based solely on the way ballot was enveloped. That has nothing to do with "counting" or "opening" ballots prior to the election (which btw is a BS rule enacted by republicans specifically to create this exact type of chaos. Dozens of states count early votes/ballots.) Republicans overwhelmingly voted in person (thus it's not surprising there was little 'curing' for them).

---

I'm saying PA should follow their own laws and not adjustments made on the fly by bureaucrats or judges. I don't care what dozens of states do I care that each state follows it's own laws. This is easily my #1 complaint with liberals, they don't care about the law only about getting the result they want. If PA wanted to count ballots received after election day they should have petitioned their legislature to change the law. That's the right way to do this and there is no other acceptable way. If we can't agree to that basic point then I'm done here. Once we decide bureaucrats can change the law we don't really need a legislature anymore, just let bureaucrats make our decisions for us. I won't waver on that point so don't bother. Do things in a manner consistent with the Constitution or don't do them.

To be as clear as I can be, I don't care about Trump or Biden or the results of this election. I do care about the Republic, the Constitution and doing things according to the rule of law. If we do that the rest will take care of itself. So much of this election was handled outside of the rule of law and you don't even appear to be arguing that point. Instead you'd like to assert that it's OK to break the law just this one time because of safety. That's just a bad way of saying laws only matter if we can't come up with a reason to say they don't. Those ballots that were "cured" were not legit ballots precisely because they were cured. In PA that's illegal. If they want it to be legal then get the legislature to change the law. Until that happens those ballots were not legit. It's really simple.

I'll take your word on the postal worker and Smokin' Joe. Honestly I only believed the last one because 12 year old me wanted it to be true. I met him as a kid when my dad was stationed at the Philly Shipyard so it made me laugh.