- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What are Mary Fanning’s credentials and where did she get her data?
Posted on 2/16/21 at 10:44 pm to NineLineBind
Posted on 2/16/21 at 10:44 pm to NineLineBind
quote:
The name Kathy Bookvar ring a bell? She did an end-run around the PA legislature. It’s been discussed ad nauseum.
It has been discussed ad nauseum largely by those who don't know what they are talking about. They claim that Bookvar wrongfully changed the procedure in Pennsylvania for rejecting absentee ballots based on signature match.
In response to these claims, Bookvar made a request for declaratory relief to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Supreme Court opined:
quote:
For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the Election Code does not authorize or require county election boards to reject absentee or mail-in ballots during the canvassing process based on an analysis of a voter’s signature on the “declaration” contained on the official ballot return envelope for the absentee or mail-in ballot.
Penn S. Ct.
Trumpites (like you) continue to make false claims that Bookvar "made an end run" around the Legislature even though the Pennsylvania Supreme Court specifically found that Bookvar did not circumvent the Pennsylvania Legislature or the Pennsylvania election code by her procedure on verification of mail-in ballots.
1
Posted on 2/16/21 at 11:13 pm to LarryK
Many on this site have advocated for a forensic audit in these states. One that would in fact validate that every legally cast vote was rightfully counted and only such votes.
To my knowledge, that has not happened. In fact, where it has happened on a smaller scale, it had shown errors.
So why hasn't it happened? Since voting fidelity is fundamental to our nation (government derives its power from the consent of the governed) and which predates congress, courts, and the COTUS.
IMO, you woefully underestimate the evil latent in the Democratic party.
To my knowledge, that has not happened. In fact, where it has happened on a smaller scale, it had shown errors.
So why hasn't it happened? Since voting fidelity is fundamental to our nation (government derives its power from the consent of the governed) and which predates congress, courts, and the COTUS.
IMO, you woefully underestimate the evil latent in the Democratic party.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 11:24 pm to LarryK
quote:
Excellent post. But there are other ways to the truth than arbitrarily choosing whom to believe. Which is why I keep coming back to the actual legal votes cast. There is only ONE WAY for a voter who hand marked a ballot in favor of Donald Trump to have that vote "electronically hacked," and that is to have it electronically tabulated as a vote for Joe Biden. Now, yes, there are fraudulent ways of doing that. But any conspirator who does it enough times had better have the ability to physically DESTROY the actual number of LEGAL Trump BALLOTS he's MISCOUNTING AS Biden's while simultaneously having the ability to GENERATE the physical number of actual COUNTERFEIT Biden ballots to MATCH the fictional number of Biden votes he is INVENTING!!!
This is absolutely false, and I assume it's intentional.
Obviously, the left can simply add fake votes and come along and stuff the boxes of ballots so that total votes match. There's tons of evidence this happened. And, there's zero way of validating the vote with the voter.
Why are you intentionally being dishonest?
Posted on 2/16/21 at 11:26 pm to LarryK
quote:
Excellent post. But there are other ways to the truth than arbitrarily choosing whom to believe. Which is why I keep coming back to the actual legal votes cast. There is only ONE WAY for a voter who hand marked a ballot in favor of Donald Trump to have that vote "electronically hacked," and that is to have it electronically tabulated as a vote for Joe Biden. Now, yes, there are fraudulent ways of doing that. But any conspirator who does it enough times had better have the ability to physically DESTROY the actual number of LEGAL Trump BALLOTS he's MISCOUNTING AS Biden's while simultaneously having the ability to GENERATE the physical number of actual COUNTERFEIT Biden ballots to MATCH the fictional number of Biden votes he is INVENTING!!!
This is absolutely false, and I assume it's intentional.
Obviously, the left can simply add fake votes and come along and stuff the boxes of ballots so that total votes match. There's tons of evidence this happened. And, there's zero way of validating the vote with the voter.
Why are you intentionally being dishonest?
quote:
If conspiracy theorists can't make an adequate legal case through the state legislatures or the court system to physically produce and independently recount EVERY LAST ONE of those ballots there is absolutely no reason to believe this categorically insane accusation
There's plenty of reason to not believe the accusation.
The inability to force the same corrupt state governments who orchestrated the fraud to allow independent persons to audit the election isn't one of them.
You are transparent.
Posted on 2/16/21 at 11:54 pm to MaryFanning
Exposing these truths... A tough row to hoe!
Networks won’t dare corroborate nor investigate these realities. I appreciate your teams cahones!
I will research, evaluate, share, etc...
Thank you for your contribution Mary!
Networks won’t dare corroborate nor investigate these realities. I appreciate your teams cahones!
I will research, evaluate, share, etc...
Thank you for your contribution Mary!
Posted on 2/17/21 at 2:39 am to AlwysATgr
Many on this site have advocated for a forensic audit in these states. One that would in fact validate that every legally cast vote was rightfully counted and only such votes. To my knowledge, that has not happened. In fact, where it has happened on a smaller scale, it had shown errors.
Which audits do you think have been done that showed errors?
Which audits do you think have been done that showed errors?
Posted on 2/18/21 at 9:59 pm to texridder
quote:
Which audits do you think have been done that showed errors?
I don't have time to research this stuff but here's an example from Windham, New Hampshire:
quote:
It is fair to say, then, that something atypical happened in Windham. Although the results of the recount did not change the outcome of the election, the discrepancy between the original tally and the recount raises questions that have not yet been answered. The article published by The Gateway Pundit assumes, without evidence, that fraud is the answer to those questions, but the fact of a discrepancy does not prove fraud. It does, however, merit further investigation.
Unusual' Shift
Posted on 2/18/21 at 10:42 pm to Wednesday
69th upvote 
Posted on 2/18/21 at 11:05 pm to tigerpimpbot
Pimp, it's my job to bump Wednesday threads
Posted on 2/19/21 at 6:20 am to LarryK
quote:
The LEGAL, HAND MARKED ballots exist.
So you assume.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 6:53 am to MaryFanning
quote:
What are Mary Fanning’s credentials and where did she get her data? by MaryFanning
Posted on 2/19/21 at 12:38 pm to VoxDawg
Do we have any admins willing to check the Mary Fanning UID IP address to see if it *might* be legit?
Posted on 2/19/21 at 12:45 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
Do we have any admins willing to check the Mary Fanning UID IP address to see if it *might* be legit?
What do you mean legit?
Mary Fanning is a nobody. She has no sources that carry their own credibility. And, her data is unverifiable because she hasn't release it, her source, the underlying methods, etc.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 12:53 pm to moneyg
I'm curious of the possibility that it might be the actual Mary Fanning. That's a helluva lot of data for a first post.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 12:57 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
I'm curious of the possibility that it might be the actual Mary Fanning
Is there an actual Mary Fanning?
quote:
That's a helluva lot of data for a first post.
It's a copy/paste from an obscure website.
DuckDuckGo "Who is Mary Fanning"
It's been a couple of weeks since this "Absolute Proof" was released...and there is zero validation of the underlying data and people can't even get real information on the major player in the documentary to determine person credibility.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 1:05 pm to moneyg
The Mary Fanning persona is clearly a pseudonym, but when you look at crazy shite that the unhinged loons on the left do to destroy the lives of anyone who doesn't agree with them and DARES step forward, I don't blame her.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 1:12 pm to MaryFanning
Is this when all the chucklefricks here come complaining about the influx of bots and shills?
Posted on 2/19/21 at 1:13 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
The Mary Fanning persona is clearly a pseudonym, but when you look at crazy shite that the unhinged loons on the left do to destroy the lives of anyone who doesn't agree with them and DARES step forward, I don't blame her.
Ok. But that reality means it’s unreasonable to rely on her unsourced information.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 1:15 pm to moneyg
No, dude, that other new poster said she knew her and Mary knows 3 and 4 star generals.
Totally legit in my book.
Totally legit in my book.
Posted on 2/19/21 at 1:45 pm to texridder
quote:
It has been discussed ad nauseum largely by those who don't know what they are talking about. They claim that Bookvar wrongfully changed the procedure in Pennsylvania for rejecting absentee ballots based on signature match.
Signature match wasn’t the only issue. I see that the liberal-dominated Pennsylvania court allowed that shite show to happen. Allowing ballots that arrived after Election Day (contrary to statute) to be counted, and then assuming that illegible or even absent postmarks were valid completed the trifecta.
All the courts punted the issue, probably with the knowledge that if they just keep kicking the can around the circle, no one would do anything about it.
Even NPR
quote:
In its ruling, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that ballots could be counted if they were received by 5 p.m. Nov. 6, as long as they were mailed by Election Day, Nov. 3. It also said that ballots without a postmark would "be presumed to have been mailed by Election Day" unless there was strong evidence to the contrary. Before this year, the state required absentee ballots to be received by Election Day
It’s clear the SOS of PA and the state SC left the door open for fraud to occur. The USSC looked the other way. Corrupt precincts saw the opening and took advantage of it. They are all on the same wavelength so there was no need for any traceable communications between these entities. The other swing states had their own little con games going at the same time. The perfect crime, given the state of our institutions.
Page 5 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News