- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
1
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:02 am to DawgCountry
quote:
He’s honestly too stupid to realize he’s proving there was fraud.
Holy fricking shite
If you want, I can walk you through how wrong you are.
This post was edited on 12/23/25 at 10:04 am
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The hand counts after stopped that.
They won’t provide the hand count ballot images.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:11 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The hand counts after stopped that.
There is no way to know. They could have added thousands of ballots during the hand count because no one knows how many ballots there was supposed to be.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:11 am to SlowFlowPro
You moved from there needing to be reprimands and financial penalties for this “clerical error” to its discovery being a waste of time, all today and within this thread.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:12 am to SlowFlowPro
Muh recounts!!!!!!!
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:14 am to G2160
quote:
They won’t provide the hand count ballot images.
There it is.
When the conspiracy is disproven, just add a new layer.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:15 am to loogaroo
quote:
They could have added thousands of ballots during the hand count because no one knows how many ballots there was supposed to be.
And there it is, again.
You've left discussing the story at hand by pivoting to your CT fantasies.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:25 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There it is. When the conspiracy is disproven, just add a new layer.
There’s no new layer.
TDS and the need to have edgy takes is a funny thing. You, the small government libertarian, are trying to find ways for why the government not being transparent here, despite state law, is ok.
Mr “I’m just asking questions” should be asking why the government does not want these ballots scrutinized.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:30 am to G2160
quote:
There’s no new layer.
You're trying to move the CT to invalidating the hand counts.
You aren't discussing the 315k vote story anymore when you do that
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:36 am to SlowFlowPro
You brought up the hand counts.
It’s all the same story of the same insecure election.
It’s all the same story of the same insecure election.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 10:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You've left discussing the story at hand by pivoting to your CT fantasies.
No. You fail to understand the whole picture.
There is no chain of custody because we have no true zero starting point.
The story is about that.
This post was edited on 12/23/25 at 11:00 am
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:00 am to G2160
quote:
You brought up the hand counts.
It’s all the same story
But it's not. You're conflating things to discuss the CTs you want to, and not the story about the 315k anymore.
What happened was, I proved my point, and to continue your argument, you're pivoting elsewhere. You have to invalidate the safeguards (hand counts) to not lose, so that's what you're attempting.
I'm just calling you out for doing that
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:01 am to loogaroo
quote:
There is no chain of custody because we have no true zero starting point.
If Column A matches Column B, then we can confirm the machines were zeroed
Explain how that statement is not correct.
Chain of custody is an NPC talking point that is not relevant to this discussion. You're conflating CTs
This post was edited on 12/23/25 at 11:02 am
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If Column A matches Column B, then we can confirm the machines were zeroed Explain how that statement is not correct.
Good lord man…there is no way to know. There is no verifiable column A.
What are they comparing the hand counts to?
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:08 am to loogaroo
quote:
There is no verifiable column A.
But there is. You're just making shite up, at this point.
As I said earlier, you've left the discussion about the 315k and are discussing something else, without being particularly specific about the subject you've pivoted to.
quote:
What are they comparing the hand counts to?
The results from the machines (column A)
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:23 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
But there is. You're just making shite up, at this point.
No I’m not. There’s no signatures on the tapes and some tapes don’t exist.
quote:
As I said earlier, you've left the discussion about the 315k and are discussing something else, without being particularly specific about the subject you've pivoted to.
We are discussing the 315k. The missing signatures and tapes are for those ballots.
From my OP:
quote:
When the law demands three signatures on tabulator tapes and the county fails to follow the rules, those 315,000 votes are, by definition, uncertified.” Cross said that the signature block was blank on every single tabulator tape the county produced for early voting (some tabulator tapes appear to be missing entirely, which is its own issue). These tapes account for just over 60% of the votes cast in 2020 in Georgia’s most populous county.
This post was edited on 12/23/25 at 11:25 am
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:35 am to loogaroo
quote:
There’s no signatures on the tapes
The signatures relevant to the 315k discussion ONLY certify the non-zero vote status of the machines.
To go back to the article
quote:
The first tape verifies that the polling machines started at a ballot count of zero (meaning any data from a previous election or sample data from a test had been erased).
quote:
The missing signatures and tapes are for those ballots.
And the missing signatures only are an issue if the machines weren't at 0 votes.
The hand counts alleviated the concerns.
Column A (machine votes) = Column B (hand count votes post-election).
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:42 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The hand counts alleviated the concerns.
For probably the 5th time in this thread, we don’t know what the hand count was, we only know what we were told it was.
GA passed a law to make the ballot images available to the public, but Fulton has refused to comply. Probably because they were repeatedly embarrassed by random people exposing how loose these elections really are, and possibly because they know that scrutiny would turn up something nefarious.
Posted on 12/23/25 at 11:44 am to G2160
quote:
For probably the 5th time in this thread, we don’t know what the hand count was, we only know what we were told it was.
For probably the 6th time, that is pivoting the discussion to an entirely different discussion/conspiracy theory.
You're just adding another layer to the CT when proven wrong. It's a classic move by Mulders.
Page 15 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News