re: Newt: an absolutely rigged election in 2020

quote:

---

The problem is when folks get Decatur-ish, using foundational knowledge or education to argue against what they assuredly realize is truth. Contrarianism is one thing, duplicity is another entirely. The latter occurs when known facts are denied.

---

Again, straw man.

Nobody is using an argument from authority or ignoring facts. They're just relying on the actual law from an actual ruling. You're disagreeing with the ruling and then molding that disagreement into a non-legal issue. Now you're forming that into some double straw man by adding an argument from authority fallacy that doesn't exist.

Nobody is using their legal knowledge/education/experience when the actual case can be linked and the ruling copied/pasted. No analysis is necessary given the clear status of the law based on the ruling.

You just don't like the ruling so you're trying to pretend it's illegitimate and the counterfactual alternative dimension is reality.

quote:

---

Instead you are ducking behind a court's unrelated finding regarding the plaintiff's filing.

---

good luck
He never addresses the real issue - massive susceptibility for election fraud while steadfastly proclaiming 'no evidence'

Presumably, he demands that you cite a verdict in some TRIAL where ALL the evidence of potential voter fraud were diligently examined and determined to have been NOT CORRECT - i.e. the election WAS CONFIRMED TO BE TOTALLY ACCURATE (at least to the extent that IF there were any fraud, it was not enough to OVERTURN that result)

However, to my knowledge he has never REFERENCED that trial

Yet he DEMANDs that anyone who now questions the validity of that election MUST PRODUCE CERTIFIED EVIDENCE that PROVEs the election WAS STOLEN.

in the absence of THAT result = the question of election fraud MUST NOT BE DISCUSSED!!!

He has no substance and he knows it.

quote:

---

Your take is analogous to saying it was nice that Putin’s political opposition made gains in the last election.

---

No it's not.

Biden was a disaster and replacing him made it worse. However, the true malaise of this situation was seen in the most leftist areas, NOT the contested areas where you'd see fraud. In the areas where this 2020 fraud allegedly occurred, we saw similar numbers in 2024. Nothing out of the ordinary given the political landscape.

Why would the DEMs cheat the most in their safest areas in 2020 and not in the heavily contested areas?

quote:

---

And you're trying to pretend that the ruling defines objective truth.

---

I don't know if THAT is the ruling to make that claim, FWIW.

quote:

---

Was the OJ ruling legitimate?

---

Legitimate? Yes.

Do I think the state proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt? I'd have voted a different way than the jury, personally. That doesn't de-legitimize the actual verdict.

quote:

---

Fear of being caught?

---

You think they had a higher fear of being caught in California compared to Georgia? Why?

quote:

---

I mean, that makes the most sense logically.

---

You're going to need to explain that logic.

I'd argue logically, the fear of being caught in Georgia would be much higher, especially due to the scrutiny, eyes watching, political system, etc., but you now have the opportunity to explain why California was some risky endeavor for pro-DEM cheating in 2024.

quote:

---

Legitimate? Yes.

---

When I say "legitimate" I don't mean "legal", I mean the court said he didn't kill Nicole. Do you think that ruling represents reality?

quote:

---

Biden was a disaster and replacing him made it worse. However, the true malaise of this situation was seen in the most leftist areas, NOT the contested areas where you'd see fraud. In the areas where this 2020 fraud allegedly occurred, we saw similar numbers in 2024. Nothing out of the ordinary given the political landscape.

Why would the DEMs cheat the most in their safest areas in 2020 and not in the heavily contested areas?

---

so, a morning to wake up and start lying all the way to nighttime

you really said that about dem-marxists safest areas? OK. So a morning to also wake up and demonstrate your ignorance... or maybe, just another lie

quote:

---

My previous post was about Pennsylvania. I mean, when you can accept ballots with no post mark, and no signature, up to three days AFTER the election…what could go wrong?

---

Even if Trump would have won Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, he still would not have had enough electoral votes to win, though.

quote:

---

So you ask me for evidence and then make it impossible for me to give evidence. #Logic

---

no - I suppose I should not be surprised that you fail to recognize the problem here.

You rely on tossing out the "where's the EVIDENCE!!!" trope to avoid discussing the real topic = was the 2020 election 'stolen' (or fraudulently decided - whatever legalize you are comfortable with)

YOUR responses to that have always been there there was NO EVIDENCE to PROVE it was stolen.

technically, you are correct - but that was because of 2 items (these are the REAL topics of discussion but you aviod addressing them)

#1 - there was never a TRIAL - to examine any evidence.

#2 - in the contested areas, none of the officials were motivated to look for any evidence.

A lot of this is rooted in the concept of NO STANDING - which (I presume means that nobody could prove they were HARMED by the outcome)

I am very limited in 'legal jargon' but have over 80 years of honing COMMON SENSE - which I have in abundance.

Until recently, common sense and 'law' were in fairly good agreement - notwithstanding the OJ Simpson verdict - et al.

My ONLY beef with YOU is that you NEVER address the COMMON SENSE arguments in this case. I presume you would not refuse to argue some of the common sense objections to the OJ verdict - perhaps even explaining to us non-atty types how the verdict made any sense at all.

But you will NOT address the bulls in the china shop wrt:
- massive changes in voting procedures (yeah - COVID - another fraud)
- massive pushing of mail-in ballots
- locating 'ballot drops' in a lot of 'convenient' places
- no follow up on images of people dumping reams of ballots into the boxes.
- no investigation into late-nite after hours 'ballot counting'
- no investigation into the HUGE disparity between rejection rates of mail in ballots between this election and prior elections
- no investigation into the separation of 'observers' from the ballot counters
- etc etc etc

There are MASSIVE insults to common sense in that election - from the way Biden hid in his basement during the campaign to the way the voting procedures were ignored.

Yet it seems in order for you to consider the matter, you demand that WE - as individual observers - accumulate all the EVIDENCE - - - - and do WHAT with it??

The sad fact is that as long as the local officials were 'satisfied' that the 'process was ok" then WE - the voting public - have to just accept it and HOPE that sometime in the future the voters in some precincts in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, etc elect more honest election officials.

2020 was - to anyone who has a brain - an OUTLIER wrt any election you can name. EVERYTHING about it was suspicious - and had CLEAR ties to CORRUPT practices.

But I suppose you'd be equally content if the girlfriend of the person who RAN the lottery showed up the day after the winning numbers were announced with the winning ticket - so long as all those who ran the lottery were OK with it .

- nobody would have STANDING demand an investigation.

quote:

---

so, a morning to wake up and start lying all the way to nighttime

you really said that about dem-marxists safest areas? OK. So a morning to also wake up and demonstrate your ignorance... or maybe, just another lie

---

I already posted this earlier in the thread