Unit2Sucks said:
BearGoggles said:
Unit2Sucks said:
BearGoggles said:
Unit2Sucks said:
BearGoggles said:
Sebastabear said:
BearForce2 said:
On January 6, they opened the doors of the Capitol to let people in and a police officer shot and killed an unarmed woman
But they called this an insurrection and more people shed tears over this in front of the tv cameras than they did over the Uvalde school shooting. .
Not posting this for you since you are a bot account that . . . once again . . , posted 500 times the night of the 2020 election which is not possible. And you have never even tried to explain how it could be possible . . . because it isn't and therefore you can't.
But for others since this BF2 account keeps wanting to talk about 2,000 Mules in dozens of threads let me lay out some facts about this "film"
- Directed by Dinesh D'Souza, who himself plead guilty to FELONY election fraud. Again HE PLED GUILTY. He admitted he knew he was breaking the law and he did it intentionally, And was pardoned by Donald Trump. So yeah, that's a great source for someone doing a documentary on election fraud on behalf of Donald Trump. No issues there at all.
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/newyork/news/press-releases/dinesh-dsouza-sentenced-in-manhattan-federal-court-to-five-years-of-probation-for-campaign-finance-fraud
- Zero evidence was provided in the film or by the group (Salem Media) that the ballots themselves were fraudulent. In fact the promoter of the film affirmatively said that. So BF2 continually asserts that the election was stolen with fake ballots which isn't even what the film itself says
Quote:
The group has not presented any evidence that the ballots themselves as opposed to their delivery were improper. "I want to make very clear that we're not suggesting that the ballots that were cast were illegal ballots. What we're saying is that the process was abused,"
- The allegation is that Democrats used "mules" to improperly bring legal (I guess) ballots and drop them off at ballot boxes - which by the way isn't even a crime in most states. The basis of this from the group creating the film is tracking IMEI cell phone data to show folks associated with these numbers were visiting ballot boxes. Two problems of course.
- First, anyone who knows anything about cell phone data knows it's not precise enough to identify visiting a particular ballot box. It couldn't even tell you what side of the street you were on. These people literally could have driven by the box multiple times over the two week period.
- Second, IMEI numbers are 15 digits. The numbers presented as "proof" are all 20 digits with lots of xxxxx's. Producers claim it's to "obfuscate the numbers." Shocking. Why is it that when asked to present "actual proof" these election conspiracy nuts always fail to deliver? I wonder.
- Speaking of failing to deliver proof, the producers claim eye witnesses. They claim video tape. They present none of it. NONE. Here's the statement from the Georgia Bureau of Investigations.
Quote:
"What has not been provided is any other kind of evidence that ties these cellphones to ballot harvesting," the bureau said in a letter. "For example, there are no statements of witnesses and no names of any potential defendants to interview." It added that while the group had said it had "a source" who could validate such findings, "despite repeated requests that source has not been provided."
So the movie, in summary, is a bunch of crap. The "proof" doesn't exist. And this BF2 account spewing memes and tweets from convicted felon D'Souza isn't anything more than the Big Lie in a new package. Credit that line to The NY Times. Here's their write up on this film. I'll breathlessly await the detailed rebuttal from the Russians who post here and pretend to be US citizens..
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/29/us/politics/2000-mules-trump-conspiracy-theory.html
Actually, ballot harvesting is limited and/or illegal in most states. CA changed the law a few years back to allow it.
https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_harvesting_laws_by_state
I'm not commenting on what did or did not happen in 2020 or the D'Souza film which I have not seen (and have no intention of watching). But there are reasons ballot harvesting is illegal or controversial, as outlined in the article below.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ballot-harvesting-collection-absentee-voting-explained-rules/
Here is an editorial discussing what has happened in So Cal where newly legalized harvesting swung several elections to the dems in 2018 and then what happened when the republicans responded.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-ballot-harvest-boomerang-11603149062
Regarding these hearings . . . I predict it will be a big circle jerk like the impeachment hearings. The left/woke crowd will be outraged, self righteous, and inflamed. The vast majority of people won't pay attention/care (or will care far less than they do about the economy and other current events).
I am willing to concede it's possible that there was massive voter fraud perpetrated by Republicans in 2020, but election fraud felon D'Souza failed to establish that. The fact that a bunch of brain dead Republicans are apoplectic over the fact that their messiah lost an election is not evidence of voter fraud.
I do think we should continue to focus on hardening our election systems to prevent Republican election fraud in future elections. I would start by outlawing doors, since that is at the top of the Republican wish list and they seem to be operating in good faith.
Man - if that's your response to what I wrote about the issue of ballot harvesting (with an article describing how both parties have done it), then you're a hopeless partisan. But we knew that. If you think ballot harvesting is a good idea, you could have just responded as such. Instead we get partisan attacks.
And its funny you refer to brain dead republicans when to this day, HRC, Abrams and their minions are still claiming they lost the 2016 elections due to fraud and/or "Russian interference." Next thing you know, you'll be telling me that only republicans gerrymander.
Separately, for those who might care to read something outside the BI bubble, here are interesting perspectives from two never Trump conservative commentators.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/yes-democrats-are-blowing-it/
The above article references this one:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/opinion/trump-republicans-coup.html
Just more partisan attacks from a shameless partisan. You don't need to go out of your way to give credibility to ridiculous election fraud claims but you still do. There is zero reason to believe that democrat harvesting exceeds Republican harvesting. Zero. More Republicans have been convicted of voter fraud in connection with 2020 than Democrats, but the numbers are tiny and inconsequential.
And it's risible to talk about Abrams or Clinton in the context of Trump. Trump literally put out a video claiming that he won in a landslide and that the election was stolen in January 2021. Clinton conceded the day after the election. Trump fomented an insurrection and tried to convince states to send fraudulent electors. Clinton didn't do that. Trump and his team of morons came up with numerous schemes to have Pence not certify election results. Clinton disappeared to NY and has mostly stayed out of the spotlight. Trump continues to hold rallies where he claims he won the election and 76% of Republicans believe that he won and that Biden stole it. 76%! Democrats aren't talking about 2016 but you still are.
You know all of this but still raise harvesting as if it somehow contributed to Trump's loss.
Forgive me if your lecture falls on deaf ears.
Of course, I didn't say harvesting contributed to Trump's loss. You made that up. I raised ballot harvesting in it response to Sebasta's post saying it was legal in most states (which is really not the case). I did imply that harvesting is bad when either party does it - not specific to trump.
I haven't defended anything Trump did post-election. In fact, I posted 2 articles highly critical of Trump which make the larger point that Trump's actions outside of the 1/6 riots are far more dangerous and improper then what happened at the capital.
Consistent with BearGreg's policy, please provide a link to your 76% claim. As usual, you did not.
And re 2016, democrats absolutely still are talking about it. HRC has repeatedly claimed trump wasn't legitimately elected and as recently as a few months ago was reading her never given victory speech.
https://www.today.com/news/politics/hillary-clinton-reads-parts-victory-speech-hoped-deliver-2016-rcna8003
Here she is in 2019 spouting off.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/09/29/hillary_clinton_trump_knows_hes_an_illegitimate_president_insomuch_as_he_has_a_conscience.html
Abrams still has not conceded her election.
And regarding misinformation and uninformed lemming voters, 72% of Dems think the 2016 election result was changed by Russian interference despite the fact that was thoroughly debunked by, among other things, the Mueller report.
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2022/democrats_still_believe_russia_changed_2016_election,
"President Joe Biden's strongest supporters are most certain that Russian interference changed the 2016 election, and to fear future interference. Among voters who Strongly Approve of Biden's job performance as president, 86% believe it's at least somewhat likely Russian interference changed the outcome of the 2016 presidential election and 75% think it is Very Likely that Russia will try to interfere in this year's congressional midterm elections."
Few things to address. First - thank you for again giving me the opportunity to post that 76% of Republicans believe the election was won by Trump and stolen by Biden. This is mainstream Republican dogma at this point. I posted this previously but it appears the original thread was scuttled - probably from right wing misinformation.
Quote:
President Biden defeated Trump in an electoral landslide that has been reaffirmed over and over by state officials from Trump's own party. But a year-and-a-half after Trump's rally to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election culminated in a violent and deadly attack on the Capitol, that fact still hasn't sunk in with a scary number of Republican-leaning voters.
Respondents to a The Economist/YouGov poll published this week were asked "Would you say that Joe Biden legitimately won the election, or not?"
By huge majorities, every Republican-leaning political subgroup Trump voters (77%), Republicans (76%), and conservatives (73%) said that "Biden did NOT legitimately win the election."
Those results represent a slight increase over the results of the same poll in February, when majorities of Trump voters (76%), Republicans (70%), and conservatives (71%) said that "Biden did NOT legitimately win the election."
The increase was most pronounced among Republicans.
...
But poll after poll have consistently shown overwhelming numbers of Republicans who falsely believe that the election was "stolen" from Trump, including one from January that shows only 17 percent of Republicans would even consider voting for a candidate who admits Biden won "fair and square."
As you can see, the garbage being spewed about the election by Trump and people who carry his water continues to impact Republican thinking.
Which brings us to the remainder of your post. This started with Sebasta eviscerating a stupid claim that 2000 Dead Horses somehow proves there was voter fraud. He specifically pointed to ballot harvesting in the context of the dumb movie. I give you credit for acknowledging the "movie" is garbage but you still felt it necessary to immediately point out that ballot harvesting is actually illegal in some places. I did not claim that you said that it contributed to the election wipeout by Trump but I did point out that you did raise it in the context of that discussion which is why I said "as if it somehow contributed." You can claim that you were just making a pointless academic claim all you want, but the context matters.
To add to your disingenuous stew, you felt the need to whatabout once again about Clinton/Abrams, again as if there were any comparison between what they did and what Trump continues to do every single day and what 76% of Republicans believe (do I need to post another link, or are you able to refer to the link I posted above?).
BearGoggles said:
Unit2Sucks said:
Sebastabear said:
Not sure it's worth going further down the "is ballot harvesting illegal" rat hole as that's not really the main point I was making about this "film." The main point being that D'Souza is a convicted felon who made a movie on behalf of the guy who pardoned him for his personal election fraud.
That movie purports to have bombshell cell phone location evidence - evidence that doesn't actually prove anyone got closer than 100 feet to these ballot boxes. And that D'Souza and his fellow producers claim eye witness testimony and video evidence that (shockingly) they can never actually produce for government investigators. Why they made a movie rather than take their "proof" to court and actually do something with it. They didn't because they can't because it's all BS.
That's the point.
But if we do want to talk ballot harvesting's illegality, here's the exact quote from The NY Times article I posted above.
Quote:
A repeated contention of the documentary is that getting paid to deliver other peoples' ballots is illegal in every state. Mr. D'Souza emailed The New York Times a citation to a federal statute that outlaws getting paid to vote and does not discuss delivering other people's ballots. Hans von Spakovsky, a Heritage Foundation fellow, appears in the movie agreeing that the practice is outlawed nationwide, but in 2019 he wrote that it was "perfectly legal" in some states for "political guns-for-hire" to collect ballots. (Asked about the discrepancy, Mr. von Spakovsky said he believed the practice is illegal based on federal law.)
The swing states where Mr. Phillips and Ms. Engelbrecht focused their research do ban the delivery of ballots on behalf of others, with some exceptions. But elections officers in 16 other states surveyed by The Times said their states did not prohibit people getting paid to deliver a ballot. Some of those states limit how many ballots an individual can deliver, or bar campaigns from doing so.
BG knows that there is no reason to believe that any illegal harvesting would have benefited democrats more than republicans. 2000 Dead Horses doesn't change that.
As Bill Barr told Trump, it's all bullsh$t.
Exactly - I do not believe that which is why I never made that claim. Its amazing how you can make things up (attribute to me things I never said/wrote) and then people here respond to it.
Please tell us what you believe I wrongly attributed to you. All I've done is point out that you know what you are doing when you respond to posts here. You don't accidentally whatabout or nitpick, it's for a reason. And whether this is the reason or not, it has the effect of supporting Trump and his election propaganda. If you don't intend to do that, you should consider when and how you whatabout and how that feeds into the propaganda campaign.
Your claim: "76% of Republicans believe that he [Trump] won and that Biden stole it.."
The poll question: "Would you say that Joe Biden legitimately won the 2020 election, or not?" to which 76% of registered republicans said no.
Those are not the same thing, but you know that. The word "legitimately" is doing a lot of work there and, in any event, it doesn't say that those people believe Trump won - in fact the question presupposes Biden won. The question is incredibly vague. I'll welcome your correction/acknowledgement that you've misrepresented the poll (which I really don't expect, because you can never give an inch or concede a single point).
In terms of misrepresenting what I've said, that is what you do (not just to me). Your specialty is attributing strawman views to people and then attacking them for positions they don't hold.
Re the final sentence, kettle, meet pot. By your standard, your posting in the Chesa Boudin thread with all kinds of whataboutism and tangential points ("Republican Billionaires" and "the recall won't change anything") was your implicit support of Boudin's policies. In fact, by your logic, you support murderers, thieves, and people who target asian americans for violence. After all, the "effect" of your posts was to oppose the recall and defend Boudin. That logic is absurd - but that is exactly what you're saying.
That is not how life (and debate) works. Sebasta can post about a movie and I can respond to a SINGLE point he raised (ballot harvesting). It is reasonable to assert that irrespective of what is in the movie, ballot harvesting is a problem (or at least perceived as such in most places). As I've stated elsewhere, I think it degrades confidence in election results - from both sides. And the article I linked to re OC elections specifically identified how both parties' were pushing the envelope on legality with their harvesting activities. In typical strawman fashion, you want to characterize that as support for Trump and/or a claim by me that "illegal harvesting would have benefited democrats more than republicans". Weak sauce.
