2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
"Despite repeated counts and audits, there is no evidence of any kind that any voting system deleted, lost, or changed votes in Georgia, or in any of the other 28 states that use Dominion devices."
"There were no "glitches" with Dominion's voting systems, and no unauthorized or last-minute software updates occurred."
"We stand with the state and local elected officials and bipartisan election volunteers that this suit maliciously maligns."

Look fuckers, either Marcia Ridley lied or you lied. You cant stand by the election officials and also claim no fault
 
They'll wait for the Biden administration to declare Powell a Tommy Robinson/Michael Flynn/Emannuel Goldstein so that all court cases against her succeed and all cases for her fail before suing.
I agree that they'll probably wait to see what shakes out, but if they were confident that Powell's claims are false they would have been a lot more forceful with their sabre rattling. Instead they give a vague 'we intend to hold her to account' which could mean anything.

Also they wouldn't have bitched out of appearing before PA state legislature and giving the same spiel if there was even an iota of truth to their statement
 
Number one reason you know they're bullshitting. If all the stuff they say is impossible really was impossible, they'd be suing her. If she's lying they've got a clear cut case of defamation.

Even if it wasn't, a defamation lawsuit would silence her and distract from Trump's lawsuits. But it would open them up to discovery, and holy FUCK you know their slack server has to be interesting as hell.
 
So, evidence has been released. Any one with the legal know-how mind reading and state the ramifications for this? Because it looks fucking serious from my perspective.



View attachment 1751833

View attachment 1751834
 
So, evidence has been released. Any one with the legal know-how mind reading and state the ramifications for this? Because it looks fucking serious from my perspective.



View attachment 1751833

View attachment 1751834

But we live in a society where you need video evidence or physical evidence to be evidence because we have people who abuse affidavits or sworn testimonties (like emmit the perjurier from Weeb Wars) any affidavit will be thrown out as hearsy.
 
Nothing like rolling into the week's end with some classic Trump. From presser yesterday @:32, Got eeem. "You're a lightweight, next question" :)

This reminds me of what Indians liked about Modi, arguably the first National Populist elected leader. The media hated him and he hated them but I remember some Indian guy saying to me that what got him elected is that he seemed like someone who'd stand up to China, Pakistan, etc.

How is Modi doing? Pretty well actually

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Indian_general_election

The Bharatiya Janata Party won 303 seats, further increasing its substantial majority[8] and the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) won 353 seats.[9] The BJP won 37.36% of votes, while the NDA's combined vote was 45% of the 60.37 crore votes that were polled.[10][11] The Indian National Congress won just 52 seats, and the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance won 91. Other parties and their alliances won 98 seats.[12]

1606483285879.png

Congress was the British Labour allied party that was the natural party of government after independence and arguably fucked the economy. Now it's one of loads of smaller minority parties fighting each other to become the natural opposition to the BJP. Congress is light blue in this diagram and the BJP is the yellow majority block.

Clearly, this election was a massive BJP victory. You can also tell it was reasonably democratic given that there's still a substantial, if divided, opposition party bloc in the legislature.
 
Last edited:
The standard of evidence bit IS officiated by a court. If you don’t like the court‘s decision on your evidence, go to a higher court then petition for a change in the laws on how evidence is handled later, because changing the rules after your evidence is mishandled probably won’t help you because of ex post facto laws (again, this is why you appeal). Sure, the legislature can in fact change the rules on the standards of evidence, but the judges will always be the one charged to uphold them. Usually an idiotic judge eventually gets the boot later down the line from either impeachment or the courts themselves via disbarring, so most judges won’t play around too much with evidence admission.

again, this legal evidence bullshit is just moving goal posts. at first, bidenbros were superduper sure that trump lost fair and square and that trumpies were being sore losers ("no evidence")

then people started to look at voter rolls, the by-the-hour count updates, the canvas/count data from wayne county and reported that none of the shit adds up ("some evidence")

then rudy had his PA hearing with raucous crowds and state legislators themselves mention the statistical anomolies, democrat poll workers mention TNB while talking about harrassment, powell filed 2 suits in ga and mi with tons of evidence. ("i don't like your evidence")

now we have people going through powell's lawsuit, looking at her evidence, reading her affidavits. twitter is blocking links to the documents. now, bidenbros are now whining about legal evidence and the court hasn't decided. ("this isnt legal evidence, no i'm not moving goal posts")

counter arguments can be made at any time by looking at the evidence. but there are none to be made. so bidenbros do what they always do and cry about "listening to the experts", in this case the courts.

guess what? the courts could throw all of this shit out and it's still evidence of fraud with no rebuttals. because the court doesnt make refutations, its the other party and they, just like the bidenbros here, can do it anytime.
 
View attachment 1751918
:thinking:

I love the fact that Based Dilbert Merchant understands the art of the shitpost. The replies to him are always full of insane people sputtering incoherently.

I actually prefer his pinned tweet but the replies are mostly positive making it an objectively inferior shitpost.

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1332296513834237952
https://archive.vn/wip/Fz2tI
1606486223767.png

Incidentally, it's interesting that archive.[vn|is|today] is so slow these days. I think it's because people are frantically archiving stuff they expect the MSM to delete soon.
 
On the topic of the radical media deflection and floundering over the lack of narrative from last night, this is currently sitting at the very top of Reddit's homepage for users who aren't logged in, ready and waiting for them to consume the headline without thinking about the greater context:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...erdon-election-press-conference-b1762682.html


Highlight is that PAC MeidasTouch that's been brought up in the thread before gloating over being the first to use #diaperdon as if starting an anti-trump hashtag was some sort of achievement.

It's simultaneously amusing and terrifying to me to see them embracing doublethink to this extent.
 
Since we're already at that stage of lawfare, I actually have a question. It is often mentioned that civil cases have a different standard of evidence compared to criminal cases. So-called "preponderance of evidence" versus "beyond reasonable doubt".

Can someone explain this in plain English? I'm very curious what this actually entails in practical terms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back