2020 United States presidential election - Conspiracy theories, alleged fraud, etc

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by JayUtah

And neither Ms Weintraub nor Mr Trainor can put the FEC's imprimatur on any opinion regarding physical election security or ballot integrity. This is not what the FEC does.

While that is true, she nonetheless did write an official letter to Trump asking him to provide evidence of his claims regarding election fraud, and she did so on FEC letterhead, and signed it in her official capacity as Chair of the FEC



(transcribed in the spoiler to make it easier to read)

August 16, 2019
Mr. President,

Back in February 2017, when you first alleged a voter-fraud scheme of astonishing scale in New Hampshire in 2016, I publicly called upon you to provide your evidence to the American people and the appropriate law-enforcement authorities so that your very serious claims could be investigate. I followed up in March 2017 with a letter to you repeating my request. You have not, so far, provided any proof of these allegations.

Last night, you repeated your claim: “New Hampshire should’ve been won last time,” you told reporters before your rally, “except we had a lot of people come in at the last moment, which was a rather strange situation, thousands and thousands of people, coming in from locations unknown. But I knew where their location was.” During your rally, you told the crowd that New Hampshire was “taken away from us.”

What I wrote to you in March 2017 is just as true now: Our democracy depends on the American people’s faith in our elections. Your voter-fraud allegations run the risk of undermining that faith. Just as seriously, baseless allegations of fraud have been used to rationalize indefensible laws that deter certain U.S. citizens from exercising their right to vote. Words matter, and facts matter.

The American people count on me, as the Chair of their Federal Election Commission, to protect the integrity of our elections. So I ask you, once again, to provide any evidence you may have to the American people and the appropriate law-enforcement authorities to substantiate your claims. The American people are ill-served when our leaders put forward unfounded allegations of voter fraud.

To put it in terms a former casino operator should understand: There comes a time when you need to lay your cards on the table or fold.

Sincerely,

Ellen L. Weintraub
Chair, Federal Election Commission.

The letter was authentic. Weintraub even posted it to her verified Twitter account on Aug. 16:

https://twitter.com/EllenLWeintraub/...74973115666434

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Bubba

This should help with understanding why some Americans believe the Dems lied, cheated and stole the election



We remember the women’s march the day after inauguration.
We remember the 4 years of attacks and impeachments
We remember “not our president” and the “Resistance…”

Edited by zooterkin:

<SNIP> Edited for rule 4. Full list can be seen here, among other place.

With the exception of violent acts (down that path is madness) it was all okay. If it hurt Trump it was good and right and just, even if it was dishonest, immoral or unethical. It's never wrong to hurt Trump. It worked. Trump is not going to be president after the end of his term. The ends justify the means.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by eerok

Prove that anyone's claim of electoral or voter fraud that would amount to a Dem conspiracy is anything more than pathetic hand-flapping. Trump lost by a landslide. That's what he said of his own 306 vote win in the electoral college in 2016: landslide. Biden kicked his ass.

There is nothing left -- no hope for Trump to ever be elected again. He's being judged as the biggest jackass in American political history, even as I speak. He will erode like a stain, and be gone. The sooner the better.

No say it's not so, I mean the man only told lies that Violated the Laws of Physics as described by James Clark Maxwell.

[eerok]

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

No say it's not so, I mean the man only told lies that Violated the Laws of Physics as described by James Clark Maxwell.

If only those were the worst lies he told.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by Resume

From where Bubba stole this without attribution, pretending it is his own.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...52276683266853

Wrong again. As usual with FB items I found it on an acquaintance's FB page or a group I follow. FB is known for passing items around unattributed. Some authors encourage it, as getting their word out is paramount.

Why would I expose acquaintances or FB groups in here?

[Resume]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Wrong again . . .

Nope. Pretending another's work to be yours is dishonest, again. So I corrected your dishonesty by identifying the actual author. Again.

[Bubba]

When were y'all gonna tell me that Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden said they were worried about Dominion's tabulators being subject to tampering by special interests.?


BTW that bad messenger girl Sydney Powell needs to be attacked by expert messenger shooters. Hurry. She says DOJ is looking into Dominion, and she is determined to see them all exposed.

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

The letter was authentic.

Yes, but still with no enforcement power or basis in law. Ms Weintraub can, even in her official capacity, "call upon" a wide variety of causes, but to what effect? The writing of open letters between feuding factions of government is a popular American political activity. They're almost always ignored as ineffectual saber-rattling and political posturing, and are almost always vetted by the responsible agency's general counsel to ensure they don't risk anything beyond rhetoric. They have no more governmental effect than the Tweet that contains them.

Note how Ms Weintraub carefully avoids demanding that the President provide evidence of ballot irregularities to the Commission, because such a request would be improper if made in her official capacity. Instead she requests that the President provide evidence "to the American people, and to the appropriate law-enforcement authorities." That general wording is safe for her to issue on her Commission's letterhead. She's not claiming authority to investigate the President's claims. She's not opining on the merits of those claims, or rebutting them. She's just urging him to report what evidence he may have to the people who do have the authority to investigate, and to the general public as a matter of good faith.

She stated that the American people rely upon the Federal Election Commission to ensure the integrity of elections (to federal office). That's true, but still only in the sense of financial integrity on the part of the campaigns for federal office. That's simply a matter of statute, and no coyness on Ms Weintraub's part creates authority that Congress did not give them. Ballot integrity is, and has always been, a matter strictly for the states. In fact, the only federal laws that apply to balloting are part of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and go only as far as mandating that polling places for elections to federal office must accommodate the disabled and elderly.

If the President had evidence of campaign finance violations on the part of, say, the 2016 Clinton campaign, then the proper law-enforcement authority would be FEC. But Ms Weintraub quotes claims by the President that allude to the improper acceptance of ballots in New Hampshire. The proper law-enforcement authority in that case would be the New Hampshire Attorney General. Full disclosure: I worked part time on a U.S. Senate campaign about ten years ago, with duties that included coordinating FEC filings and communications on behalf of the campaign. I have personal experience in what the FEC is allowed to ask for and enforce.

Vague platitudes alluding to the faith of the American electorate, and cautionary references to laws made by jurisdictions she has no control over, are great political theater. But neither Ms Weintraub nor any other federal official has any actual authority over how states choose to regulate voting. As long as statements are worded not to imply authority they don't actually possess or compel a duty not within their mandate, even holders of federal office can urge other political functionaries to "do the right thing" in open letters, even when there are partisan overtones to the exhortation.

When it comes down to it, the FEC has subpoena authority. Had any of what Ms Weintraub wrote about been anything her Commission had the actual authority to investigate, she could have compelled the production of evidence from either the President or the authorities in New Hampshire. But since it wasn't, all she can do is write strongly-but-carefully-worded letters and post them to Twitter.

In contrast, Mr Trainor may certainly have formed a personal opinion regarding ballot integrity. He may even have drawn a conclusion based on his judgment of evidence before him. And he certainly has as much right as any other citizen to publish that conclusion in whatever form. But it should not in any way be taken as the conclusions or findings of any federal agency empowered to regulate ballot integrity, with which Mr Trainor may be associated, or even as particularly better informed by virtue of the FEC's purported activity.

In contrast, Ms Weintraub does not render an opinion on Commission letterhead as to whether President Trump's previous claims were true or false. Nor does she, either in her personal or official capacity, offer a competing opinion. She merely notes the deleterious effect of unevidenced claims. While I disagree with any attempt at politicking under color of government office, it appears Ms Weintraub has taken the appropriate precautions to avoid making any statements in her official capacity that would be improper as an FEC Commissioner or as the Chair. Even in her comments to CNN, she correctly defers to state and local authority, which is the proper authority for estimates of ballot integrity. It's not clear to me that Mr Trainor has been as careful or appropriately deferential.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by Bubba

As usual with FB items I found it on an acquaintance's FB page or a group I follow. FB is known for passing items around unattributed.

Excellent. So you now confirm........

1) You plagiarise other people's opinions on Facebook and claim them as your own
2) You don't check anything you copy or paste here, which maybe 100% lies.

Yep. We already knew that.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Bubba

When were y'all gonna tell me that Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden said they were worried about Dominion's tabulators being subject to tampering by special interests.?


BTW that bad messenger girl Sydney Powell needs to be attacked by expert messenger shooters. Hurry. She says DOJ is looking into Dominion, and she is determined to see them all exposed.

You know Dominion machines are backed up by paper ballots Right?

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

You know Dominion machines are backed up by paper ballots Right?

How could he possibly know that?

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by JayUtah

Yes, but still with no enforcement power or basis in law. Ms Weintraub can, even in her official capacity, "call upon" a wide variety of causes, but to what effect? The writing of open letters between feuding factions of government is a popular American political activity. They're almost always ignored as ineffectual saber-rattling and political posturing, and are almost always vetted by the responsible agency's general counsel to ensure they don't risk anything beyond rhetoric. They have no more governmental effect than the Tweet that contains them.

Note how Ms Weintraub carefully avoids demanding that the President provide evidence of ballot irregularities to the Commission, because such a request would be improper if made in her official capacity. Instead she requests that the President provide evidence "to the American people, and to the appropriate law-enforcement authorities." That general wording is safe for her to issue on her Commission's letterhead. She's not claiming authority to investigate the President's claims. She's not opining on the merits of those claims, or rebutting them. She's just urging him to report what evidence he may have to the people who do have the authority to investigate, and to the general public as a matter of good faith.

She stated that the American people rely upon the Federal Election Commission to ensure the integrity of elections (to federal office). That's true, but still only in the sense of financial integrity on the part of the campaigns for federal office. That's simply a matter of statute, and no coyness on Ms Weintraub's part creates authority that Congress did not give them. Ballot integrity is, and has always been, a matter strictly for the states. In fact, the only federal laws that apply to balloting are part of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and go only as far as mandating that polling places for elections to federal office must accommodate the disabled and elderly.

If the President had evidence of campaign finance violations on the part of, say, the 2016 Clinton campaign, then the proper law-enforcement authority would be FEC. But Ms Weintraub quotes claims by the President that allude to the improper acceptance of ballots in New Hampshire. The proper law-enforcement authority in that case would be the New Hampshire Attorney General. Full disclosure: I worked part time on a U.S. Senate campaign about ten years ago, with duties that included coordinating FEC filings and communications on behalf of the campaign. I have personal experience in what the FEC is allowed to ask for and enforce.

Vague platitudes alluding to the faith of the American electorate, and cautionary references to laws made by jurisdictions she has no control over, are great political theater. But neither Ms Weintraub nor any other federal official has any actual authority over how states choose to regulate voting. As long as statements are worded not to imply authority they don't actually possess or compel a duty not within their mandate, even holders of federal office can urge other political functionaries to "do the right thing" in open letters, even when there are partisan overtones to the exhortation.

When it comes down to it, the FEC has subpoena authority. Had any of what Ms Weintraub wrote about been anything her Commission had the actual authority to investigate, she could have compelled the production of evidence from either the President or the authorities in New Hampshire. But since it wasn't, all she can do is write strongly-but-carefully-worded letters and post them to Twitter.

In contrast, Mr Trainor may certainly have formed a personal opinion regarding ballot integrity. He may even have drawn a conclusion based on his judgment of evidence before him. And he certainly has as much right as any other citizen to publish that conclusion in whatever form. But it should not in any way be taken as the conclusions or findings of any federal agency empowered to regulate ballot integrity, with which Mr Trainor may be associated, or even as particularly better informed by virtue of the FEC's purported activity.

In contrast, Ms Weintraub does not render an opinion on Commission letterhead as to whether President Trump's previous claims were true or false. Nor does she, either in her personal or official capacity, offer a competing opinion. She merely notes the deleterious effect of unevidenced claims. While I disagree with any attempt at politicking under color of government office, it appears Ms Weintraub has taken the appropriate precautions to avoid making any statements in her official capacity that would be improper as an FEC Commissioner or as the Chair. Even in her comments to CNN, she correctly defers to state and local authority, which is the proper authority for estimates of ballot integrity. It's not clear to me that Mr Trainor has been as careful or appropriately deferential.

Not doubting any of that Jay. I wasn't trying to infer I that she had any authority, I was just putting it out there as a counter to Bubba's nonsense about Trainor.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

You know Dominion machines are backed up by paper ballots Right?

So when Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden expressed concern about the Dominion machines, they knew that paper ballot backups made fraud impossible? So why did they lie?

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

So when Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden expressed concern about the Dominion machines, they knew that paper ballot backups made fraud impossible? So why did they lie?

Since when is expressing concern the same as lying?

Do you have any evidence the election was fraudulent?

[eerok]

Originally Posted by Bubba

BTW that bad messenger girl Sydney Powell needs to be attacked by expert messenger shooters. Hurry. She says DOJ is looking into Dominion, and she is determined to see them all exposed.

Who cares? I hear Rudy is looking into his pants.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by eerok

Who cares? I hear Rudy is looking into his pants.

I hope the judge makes him wash his hands before he turns over any evidence.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by eerok

If only those were the worst lies he told.

On that I agree Birthers were more dangerous that Twoofers, but when you mix Birthers anti Semites and Racist, it really get interesting!
People are Critical of me for not speaking out when I was attacked in 2008, but I know my State Kentucky, I know who has power and how Courpt the powerful people are, a poor man can't fight a rich man because he simply doesn't have the Money and power to do so, so you have to be patient and bid your time survive and wait.
Eventually Karma will take care if it, because Trump opened his mouth and was proven a Fool and a failure and that's why he lost.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

So when Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden expressed concern about the Dominion machines, they knew that paper ballot backups made fraud impossible? So why did they lie?

Vote total can be changed on the tabulators only by dirrectly accessing the hard drives now, that wasn't true in 2017.

[gabeygoat]

Originally Posted by Bubba

This should help with understanding why some Americans believe the Dems lied, cheated and stole the election



We remember the women’s march the day after inauguration.
We remember the 4 years of attacks and impeachments
We remember “not our president” and the “Resistance…”

Edited by zooterkin:

<SNIP> Edited for rule 4. Full list can be seen here, among other place.

That is the whiniest cry baby thing I’ve read.

[The Great Zaganza]

Not 100% supporting Trump even if, or especially when he is violating the laws and Constitution, is the same as cheating.

Imagine what Trump could have achieved if just everyone just did what he told them to without reservation!

[CORed]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Not 100% supporting Trump even if, or especially when he is violating the laws and Constitution, is the same as cheating.

Imagine what Trump could have achieved if just everyone just did what he told them to without reservation!

I just imagined that. Now I need a good stiff drink.

[grmcdorman]

Meanwhile, the US federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has distributed a joint statement in its official capacity - via its director, Chris Krebs - that says they have "utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections".

https://www.cisa.gov/news/2020/11/12...uncil-election

In particular:

Originally Posted by CISA

There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.

...

While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too. When you have questions, turn to elections officials as trusted voices as they administer elections.

(bolding theirs).

See also https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tate-officials. Krebs, according that story, is expecting to be fired by Trump, presumably because "Krebs has been vocal on Twitter in repeatedly reassuring Americans that the election was secure and that their votes would be counted."

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by grmcdorman

Meanwhile, the US federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has distributed a joint statement in its official capacity - via its director, Chris Krebs - that says they have "utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections".
...

My guess: Cyber Command told their counterparts in Russia, Iran and China that there would by massive retaliation if they pulled anything during the election.

[Hans]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

My guess: Cyber Command told their counterparts in Russia, Iran and China that there would by massive retaliation if they pulled anything during the election.

I believe that might have been true. Each side has infilitrated the other and can do damage to the infrastructure of the others - and they know that.

Its just like the nuclear MAD idea. We can fight 3rd party proxy conventional wars but if you go all out everybody gets nuked.

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Not doubting any of that Jay. I wasn't trying to infer I that she had any authority, I was just putting it out there as a counter to Bubba's nonsense about Trainor.

Oh, sure. I just thought it deserved a thorough discussion even if there was no actual dispute. Since everyone's talking about American politics this year, the question frequently comes up among non-Americans why we don't attempt to regulate elections at the federal level and establish some uniform standards for ballot security. They note the patchwork of state laws and practices and wonder why we put up with it. Our only answer is to point to Alexander Hamilton and James Madison and then just shrug; the Constitution simply wouldn't allow it as presently written.

But more importantly, even many Americans wrongly believe that there already is just such a body of federal law, because it's a logical thing to want, and wrongly believe that the FEC is the federal law-enforcement body tasked with enforcing it. It certainly sounds on its face like it should be.

Mr Trainor's statements represented here, Ms Weintraub's statements to CNN, and the letter you referenced do nothing to dispel that misconception. Indeed, they seem to be fostering it, and this leads to the inevitable suspicious that there may be political motives in each case to maintain the illusion. I believe the only honest statement that a member of the FEC can make on a ballot controversy is something like, "The FEC doesn't have any say or oversight in how states collect and process ballots, but as Americans with a special interest in free and fair elections, we urge each state to be transparent and diligent."

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by grmcdorman

Meanwhile, the US federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has distributed a joint statement in its official capacity - via its director, Chris Krebs - that says they have "utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections".

This, to me, is more important than observers and inspectors at polling places, although I think both should occur. My friends in cybersecurity tell me that the digital infrastructure of balloting is a far softer, far more attractive target than the actual absentee ballots or the individual polling stations and voting machines. The amount of effort you would have to go through to alter or suppress enough votes to sway the election by manipulating individual ballots or ballot machines is prohibitive. The tally machines are far more attractive because at that point the votes just exist as stored data. You have to compromise far fewer assets to make changes at that level, and you have the capacity to affect far more votes.

[Allen773]

Originally Posted by Hans

Its just like the nuclear MAD idea. We can fight 3rd party proxy conventional wars but if you go all out everybody gets nuked.

MAD has never been the policy of the US government. The US has always left first use/pre-emptive strikes on the table.

Sorry to single you out but this is just one of those pernicious myths about the Cold War that unfortunately persists.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by JayUtah

This, to me, is more important than observers and inspectors at polling places, although I think both should occur. My friends in cybersecurity tell me that the digital infrastructure of balloting is a far softer, far more attractive target than the actual absentee ballots or the individual polling stations and voting machines. The amount of effort you would have to go through to alter or suppress enough votes to sway the election by manipulating individual ballots or ballot machines is prohibitive. The tally machines are far more attractive because at that point the votes just exist as stored data. You have to compromise far fewer assets to make changes at that level, and you have the capacity to affect far more votes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie

Do we still await evidence of fraud on a scale that would genuinely put the election result into question, from Trump or any of his supporters?

Originally Posted by Paul2

No.

Are you sure?? Contrary to concerted MSM driven desperate denial hysteria, Biden just might be going down.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

A member mentioned the internet said Dominion machines flipped millions of votes from trump to Biden

Quote:

A member reported that Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden all expressed concern about the Dominion machines' security.

Quote:

Some other member said fraud is impossible, because Dominion tallies "are backed up by paper ballots"

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

So when Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden expressed concern about the Dominion machines, they knew that paper ballot backups made fraud impossible? So why did they lie?

Internet people claim that Dominion tech was made for flipping votes in other countries.

Attorney Sydney Powell says she is exposing massive vote flipping. She names Dominion and Smartmatic. She says Biden is stealing the election. She said: "I am going to expose them all."


You of course will want Sydney's evidence to be seen and adjudicated, since your presidential election is at stake, as the good honest citizens y'all are.

The actual decision making process (exposing fraud) is just getting started.

Sydney Powell, video at link below.

Quote:

This woman is no fool. She is on Trumps team. I can not imagine she would say these things without solid evidence.

https://www.michaelsmithnews.com/202...he-kraken.html

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by gabeygoat

That is the whiniest cry baby thing I’ve read.

HOW DARE ANYBODY NOT LOVE DEAR LEADER!

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Not 100% supporting Trump even if, or especially when he is violating the laws and Constitution, is the same as cheating.

Imagine what Trump could have achieved if just everyone just did what he told them to without reservation!

Any disagreeemnt with Dear Leader is treason. Get with the program.

[Bubba]

Messenger shooters had better begin loading up



Sidney Powell told Lou Dobbs that she could hardly wait to show the evidence she had on the Dominion machines. She stated that it was funded by Cuba, Venezuela and even China for Hugo Chavez. She stated that the machines were created to sell data to other countries, which was the epitome of “foreign election interference.”

She told him that the states that shut down their vote count on Election Night were where the most egregious fraud took place. She claims to have statistical evidence that is “staggering.” She stated that some of Governors and Secretaries of State may have had a financial interest in the machines, as well as some well known others.


https://news.unclesamsmisguidedchild...se-the-kraken/

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Messenger shooters had better begin loading up



Sidney Powell told Lou Dobbs that she could hardly wait to show the evidence she had on the Dominion machines. She stated that it was funded by Cuba, Venezuela and even China for Hugo Chavez. She stated that the machines were created to sell data to other countries, which was the epitome of “foreign election interference.”

She told him that the states that shut down their vote count on Election Night were where the most egregious fraud took place. She claims to have statistical evidence that is “staggering.” She stated that some of Governors and Secretaries of State may have had a financial interest in the machines, as well as some well known others.


https://news.unclesamsmisguidedchild...se-the-kraken/

Man. That sounds pretty serious. We'll be waiting with bated breath, for sure. I wonder why she hasn't come forward already, with something this explosive? That's weird.

[Elagabalus]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Are you sure?? Contrary to concerted MSM driven desperate denial hysteria, Biden just might be going down.





Internet people claim that Dominion tech was made for flipping votes in other countries.

Attorney Sydney Powell says she is exposing massive vote flipping. She names Dominion and Smartmatic. She says Biden is stealing the election. She said: "I am going to expose them all."


You of course will want Sydney's evidence to be seen and adjudicated, since your presidential election is at stake, as the good honest citizens y'all are.

The actual decision making process (exposing fraud) is just getting started.

Quote:

This woman is no fool. She is on Trumps team. I can not imagine she would say these things without solid evidence.

Sydney Powell, video at link below.

If she is on Trump's team that makes her a fool.

Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell give EMBARRASSING Fox News Interview with Maria Bartiromo

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Love the comments.

[Elagabalus]

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

So when Democrats Mark Pocan, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Ron Wyden expressed concern about the Dominion machines, they knew that paper ballot backups made fraud impossible? So why did they lie?

Perhaps because they expressed concerns about the Vulnerabilities and Shortcomings of Election Technology Industry with regards to Private Equity and the need for transparency.

It's a bit long and boring, here:

Warren, Klobuchar, Wyden, and Pocan Investigate Vulnerabilities and Shortcomings of Election Technology Industry with Ties to Private Equity

[Bubba]

To see your grades, look below each reply

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

Man. That sounds pretty serious. We'll be waiting with bated breath, for sure. I wonder why she hasn't come forward already, with something this explosive? That's weird.

C+

Originally Posted by Elagabalus

If she is on Trump's team that makes her a fool.

Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell give EMBARRASSING Fox News Interview with Maria Bartiromo

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Love the comments.

C+

Originally Posted by Elagabalus

Perhaps because they expressed concerns about the Vulnerabilities and Shortcomings of Election Technology Industry with regards to Private Equity and the need for transparency.

It's a bit long and boring, here:

Warren, Klobuchar, Wyden, and Pocan Investigate Vulnerabilities and Shortcomings of Election Technology Industry with Ties to Private Equity

C+




You were graded according to your messenger shooting performance.

You did OK, but you can do better. Practice puffing up your pompous bluster and bravado techniques. Then try again.

Hint: Apply more arrogance, condescension, and abusive language..

[Allen773]

You're grading people? Odd.

[Bubba]

Originally Posted by Allen773

You're grading people? Odd.

Reaching for a reason to say "Odd" ??


Sense of humor wasnt obvious in the remarks below the grades??

"Practice puffing up your pompous bluster and bravado techniques. Then try again.
Hint: Apply more arrogance, condescension, and abusive language."



As Biden says: "C'mon man"



May as well have a little fun while we wait for the final outcome of the election.

Note the difference...

You guys say "Biden won fair and square"

I say "Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell"

[Allen773]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Reaching for a reason to say "Odd"
Sense of humor wasnt obvious in the remarks below the grades??
"Practice puffing up your pompous bluster and bravado techniques. Then try again.
Hint: Apply more arrogance, condescension, and abusive language."



As Biden says: "C'mon man"



May as well have a little fun while we wait for the final outcome of the election.

Note the difference...

You guys say "Biden won fair and square"

I say "Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell"

Yes, indeed. That's my reply to your posts in this thread.

"C'mon, man!"

[Resume]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

Man. That sounds pretty serious. We'll be waiting with bated breath, for sure. I wonder why she hasn't come forward already, with something this explosive? That's weird.

The evidence will be coming, how do you say . . . Oh yeah, any day now.

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by Resume

The evidence will be coming, how do you say . . . Oh yeah, any day now.

Two Weeks!