- 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: NYT: Fox Stars Privately Expressed Disbelief About Election Fraud Claims. ‘Crazy Stuff.’
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:07 am to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:07 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Clearly. They intentionally made the voting system less secure than its ever been.
After I posted above I recalled that Democrats prior to 2020 tried to pass some election security laws regarding electronic voting machines that Republicans shot down:
quote:
McConnell defends blocking election security bill, rejects criticism he is aiding Russia
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Monday defended his decision to block an election security bill and lashed out at critics who suggested he was helping Russia, accusing them of engaging in “modern-day McCarthyism” to “smear” his record.
quote:
The House-passed bill would authorize more than $600 million for updating voting equipment to comply with new standards between now and 2020, including requirements that voting machines produce a paper record, stay disconnected from the Internet and be produced in the United States.
One Republican, Rep. Brian Mast (Fla.), joined Democrats in backing the measure last month.
Republicans, including McConnell, have opposed the bill because it imposes federal standards on an issue traditionally handled by the states.
“I’m not going to let Democrats and their water carriers in the media use Russia’s attack on our democracy as a Trojan horse for partisan wish list items that would not actually make our elections any safer,” McConnell said. “I’m not going to do that.”
LINK
2
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:10 am to cwill
The presentation is made by the style of news reporting of what "The Fox Stars" said regarding the election theft of 2020.
and yes, the words " according to a legal filing " were there. ETA: WAAAAAY DOWN in paragraph 20
But as many here have opined - it is the same kind of thing of which the NY Times has done repeatedly since President Trump announced his candidacy.
The headlines belied the small hidden notation
some religions savor tricks of this nature
and yes, the words " according to a legal filing " were there. ETA: WAAAAAY DOWN in paragraph 20
But as many here have opined - it is the same kind of thing of which the NY Times has done repeatedly since President Trump announced his candidacy.
The headlines belied the small hidden notation
some religions savor tricks of this nature
This post was edited on 2/17/23 at 11:18 am
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:11 am to cwill
Good recollection. The background for that was in the previous cycle, Dems had been worried about Russian intrusions into state voters systems that had occurred during the 2016 campaign, and advocated for paper backups.
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:13 am to NC_Tigah
... the NYT exposed themselves back I n 2006 when the published that fluff piecs about Hurricane Katrina ...
that far back ...
these hacks are scrambling today to make sure they keep that wool over your eyes
REALLY SCRAMBLING
quote:
You do realize they never actually investigated whether there was election fraud, right?
... because the courts themselves own the ballots now and the courts themselves have not started investigations ...
and this is what that that Burnson case was trying to do, to get the issue of voter fraud before the the SCOTUS.
But the case was declined for review on Jan. 9.
But then Brunson was resubmitted to the SCOTUS on Jan. 23rd AND THEN
the SCOTUS scheduled a private conference for today.
AND
THIS
IS
WHY
ALL
MEDIA
IS
GOING
FULL
BOAR
TO
SHOVE
NO
VOTER
FRAUD
DOWN
YOUR
THROAT
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:15 am to cwill
quote:Same question applies: What was the specific reference?
The NYT is quoting the Dominion pleadings which in turn are quoting from phone/email records obtained from Fox in discovery. For example:
The filing would have us believe Tucker's unfortunately invective laden statement applies to everything Powell said. Does it? Or does it have to do with Powell going after Fox for things like the horribly inappropriate early call in AZ, refusal to pursue investigations on its own, and otherwise putting Carlson, Hannity, Wallace, et al on notice.
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:16 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Good recollection.
quote:and congratulations on your first post over two phrases
Fox is doing everything the maniacs believe the MSM is doing. They’re lying for market share....
got help?
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:16 am to JJJimmyJimJames
quote:
The presentation is made by the style of news reporting of what "The Fox Stars" said regarding the election theft of 2020.
and yes, the words " according to a legal filing " were there.
But as many here have opined - it is the same kind of thing of which the NY Times has done repeatedly since President Trump announced his candidacy.
The headlines belied the small hidden notation
some religions savor tricks of this nature
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:17 am to Lakeboy7
quote:Negative.
81 million people voted against Trump.
There were 81 million votes*
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:20 am to cwill
quote:WAAAAAY down in paragraph 20 or so of an article read as part of a sports forum political chat.
and yes, the words " according to a legal filing " were there.
Yeah, thats a good example of grading on nonsense
go ahead and congrats on having a second thought in one day
its a good day
EDITED: WAIT, your post is still only one phrase and some copy/paste someone showed you... oh well, have a good day regardless; you having more than a phrase or two COULD still happen some day
This post was edited on 2/17/23 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:23 am to TigerDoc
quote:DVS would be one of those systems. Now DVS is trying to sue for the same claim.
The background for that was in the previous cycle, Dems had been worried about Russian intrusions into state voters systems
Again, the DVS bastards had an opportunity to transparently address this. They used every means at their disposal to obfuscate and obstruct investigations.
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:24 am to NC_Tigah
... you know ...
maybe, just maybe
this recall effort to oust Cantrell may just give you a synopsis--- a historical one at that ---
A historical Synopsis of how far, wide and deep this corruption goes
Imagine that
who would athought
This post was edited on 2/17/23 at 11:25 am
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:26 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Negative. There were 81 million votes*
Or even more accurately, 81 million ballots, a lot of them illegally “harvested.”
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:26 am to thatthang
quote:That doesn't sound right, but go ahead and link the post(s) you're referring to. I'd be happy to address them.
100% on the “muh Dominion changed all the votes train!” There was no doubt, it wasn’t “well, that could have happened.”
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:48 am to cwill
So its your contention that democrats made voting (on the net) MORE secure than it was in 2016?
Give me a second to laugh my a$$ off at you.
Give me a second to laugh my a$$ off at you.
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:51 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The filing would have us believe Tucker's unfortunately invective laden statement applies to everything Powell said. Does it? Or does it have to do with Powell going after Fox for things like the horribly inappropriate early call in AZ, refusal to pursue investigations on its own, and otherwise putting Carlson, Hannity, Wallace, et al on notice.
Well we can also see in the pleading that Carlson also thinks the early call was "bad" in that it was damaging to Foxnews, so I think we can say that he's not saying she's lying about that. Not sure how you could say it's a lie to have the opinion it was too soon.
Here's more from Tuck day before his text exchange with Ingraham and a few days after:
Tuck a couple of days after his intereview and just before the Ingraham text:
More:
Seems triangulated.
Caveat: Maybe, I'm saying there is a chance Fox's response brief will provide some fantastic contextual quotes that will frame this completely differently than Dominion's lawyers. Maybe.
This post was edited on 2/17/23 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:51 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
So its your contention that democrats made voting (on the net) MORE secure than it was in 2016?
No. The legislation was blocked by Republicans.
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:55 am to cwill
quote:
No. The legislation was blocked by Republicans.
so allow me to ask this way. Despite Republican claims that this bill did dick for election integrity, had it passed, paired with the sweeping covid mail in "reforms" championed by democrats, do you think the system would be more secure today than it was when Trump was elected? Because if you do, you need help
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:55 am to JJJimmyJimJames
quote:
WAAAAAY down in paragraph 20 or so of an article read as part of a sports forum political chat
go ahead and congrats on having a second thought in one day
its a good day
EDITED: WAIT, your post is still only one phrase and some copy/paste someone showed you... oh well, have a good day regardless; you having more than a phrase or two COULD still happen some day
Posted on 2/17/23 at 11:58 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Despite Republican claims that this bill did dick for election integrity,
They didn't make that claim.
quote:
ad it passed, paired with the sweeping covid mail in "reforms" championed by democrats, do you think the system would be more secure today than it was when Trump was elected?
It included most of the provisions the stop the steal crowd now claims were missing prior to 2020.
I understand it's difficult to deal with this information if you're entire view has been shaped by a false belief about election integrity and who is responsible.
This post was edited on 2/17/23 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 2/17/23 at 12:04 pm to cwill
quote:
They didn't make that claim.
from your link...
quote:
“I’m not going to let Democrats and their water carriers in the media use Russia’s attack on our democracy as a Trojan horse for partisan wish list items that would not actually make our elections any safer,” McConnell said. “I’m not going to do that.”
And this issue with the bill was federalization of state election issues. Not election security per se. But you already know that.
And if you are trying to sell the board on the idea that Dems wanted to institute real security reforms on the very issues they eagerly implemented then leveraged in 2020 to win the WH and both houses of congress, you are going to have to sell harder. A lot harder.
Page 10 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News