Barr and FBI say zero evidence
- Thread starter Boom MFer Dawg
- Start date
And Gabriel Sterling tells it like it is....
Lin Wood has lost his marbles over this election. His tweets along with Powells are becoming more and more erratic and insane.
Not surprising. The DOJ and FBI have proven over the past 12 years just how political they have become. Thanks Obama.
Barr does nothing but Trump's bidding, but he can't conjure up a fraudulent election.
Although Trump’s across the board claims are outlandish, his request to match signatures on the mail in votes seemed reasonable. At least a sample to see if most seemed legit. However, the way it was setup, to ensure privacy, I think at this point it is impossible.
I don’t disagree setup was flawed, Governor and Secretary of State know it, but they can’t undo it at this point or that is my take. It’s a quagmire at this point, all participants in this mix are wrong.
Signatures WERE matched when ballots received and counted. Lying Donnie's claims are farcical.
What the hell are you talking about!!!’ Thanks Obama!!! Are you insane!!!! Barr is fat Rumps Personal lawyer for the 2-3 years he has been in place!! The most political AG for a supposed non-partisan position ever!!! Blatant and overt actions to try to hide Rumps illegal actions!!! My gosh!!!
Last edited:
The envelopes have already been separated from the ballots after they were matched. Let me repeat that- they were already matched. Would we have a free society if people did not feel free to express their vote without fear it could be exposed and even used against them? The secrecy of the ballot is important.
RoyDawg your a good poster, but color me very skeptical that a high degree of verification of signature matches was going on in Fulton County. They don’t update their software, do some counting in secret, are the last county to have their stuff together but they match signatures on all mail in ballots and throw out any questionable ones near 100% accuracy. Those statistical anomalies are all explainable as well. Just extremely skeptical. If a sample audit is done , which Governor has proposed, and signature verifications are accurate then I am wrong, we shall see...
“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election," Barr told The Associated Press. BTW, Investigations nor has day in court been stopped...deep state might be too corrupt, we shall see. If it is, you might like...many will not. You all in with the msm corruption...
Last edited:
100 percent true. And why this fight will probably end in nothing found. No way to prove anything after that. The pandemic caused this system to be used. And it was used to win the election. Bottom line. Things will be checked on as it should be with the difference in voter participation this election created. But unless something changes, it is over.
Republicans everywhere need to grow a pair!!! Sterling obviously has.
I watched ABC news last night at a relative's house and if you didn't hear the quote, you'd have thought Barr had completed a thorough investigation and nothing was found. No mention of the 4:00 am document dumps, the near statistical impossibilities of the 4:00am Biden bounce or the hundreds of sworn affidavits. Nope, just Trump's unfounded claims had been debunked by an AG that always had his back.
Their coverage of Biden consisted of him saying help is on the way and a couple of fluffy lines. They then said McConnell said Biden would want more stimulus which they said was an admission Biden won. I've accepted the outcome but if you had not actually read what Barr said, you would have been informed by pure propaganda.
Their coverage of Biden consisted of him saying help is on the way and a couple of fluffy lines. They then said McConnell said Biden would want more stimulus which they said was an admission Biden won. I've accepted the outcome but if you had not actually read what Barr said, you would have been informed by pure propaganda.
Last edited:
1. Read the article. Very clear he is telling Wood/Powell to quit wasting time with criminal accusation that will take years to prosecute. Focus on civil court.
2. No evidence of wide spread voter fraud
A. Yet
B. He didn't say election fraud.
Not that I expect him or the DOJ to do anything before January. As he implied it takes a long time to build a criminal case. That is neither good nor bad for Trump
2. No evidence of wide spread voter fraud
A. Yet
B. He didn't say election fraud.
Not that I expect him or the DOJ to do anything before January. As he implied it takes a long time to build a criminal case. That is neither good nor bad for Trump
First off, the signatures were verified, the first time. Secondly, again, and I hate to keep saying this, but if there is evidence of fraud, anywhere, anyhow, anyway, bring it to the courts. Let's get fair with it, bring it to the courts.
Maybe so. But which signature was it matched with? The one on file in eNet or the one on the application?
The March consent agreement entered into by the state and Democratic Party appears to give election officials the option to check signatures against the one on file in eNet OR the signature on the application.
From the consent agreement on page 3:
“If the registrar or absentee ballot clerk determines that the voter’s signature on the mail-in absentee ballot envelope does not match any of the voter’s signatures on file in eNet or on the absentee ballot application, the registrar or absentee ballot clerk must seek review from two other registrars, deputy registrars, or absentee ballot clerks.”
Notice the word “or” before “absentee ballot application”
This is different from GA law which states:
“(B) Upon receipt of each ballot, a registrar or clerk shall write the day and hour of the receipt of the ballot on its envelope. The registrar or clerk shall then compare the identifying information on the oath with the information on file in his or her office, shall compare the signature or mark on the oath with the signature or mark on the absentee elector's voter registration card and application for absentee ballot or a facsimile of said signature or mark taken from said card or application, and shall, if the information and signature appear to be valid and other identifying information appears to be correct, so certify by signing or initialing his or her name below the voter's oath.”
Surely one can see the problem with matching a signature with the one on the application which could be sent in by a fraudulent voter originally. Massive mail-in balloting created a situation where the signature verification process was overwhelmed and possibly subverted. This is what needs to be investigated.
The bottom line is the consent agreement changed the manner in which elections are carried out in Georgia which is counter to the US Constitution - Article 1 Section 4 - in more ways than outlined here.
Here is another little interesting nugget from the consent agreement (not agreed to by the legislature and therefore unconstitutional)
Under the consent agreement, signatures are to be evaluated using guidance provided by the Democratic Party of Georgia.
See page 4:
“Consideration of Additional Guidance for Signature Matching.
The State Defendants agree to consider in good faith providing county registrars and absentee ballot clerks with additional guidance and training materials to follow when comparing voters’ signatures that will be drafted by the Political Party Committees’ handwriting and signature review expert.”
Does anyone see a problem with using guidance from a single political party to evaluate signatures?
Here is a link to the consent agreement which changes the manner in which Georgia elections are carried out counter to the US Constitution.
https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/07/GA-Settlement-1.pdf
Last edited:
And that is where Governor and Secretary of State are in trouble and lost favor with Many supporters. They over stepped their authority and dumbed down the requirements for mail in vote verification. They realize it now, but can’t go back....
This may be the very first valid election related complaint I have seen. Unfortunately the remedy would have been an injunction against implementation of the consent agreement BEFORE the election.
The ballot application signature is already checked against the eNet signature BEFORE the ballot is mailed, so those signatures are already determined to be the same...
Correct. Georgia law ALSO requires the signature match procedure to be followed when the ballot is received.
So Georgia has a two step process in state law to verify signatures. If one fails, hopefully the other one will catch the mismatch.
This is especially important in a year in which the sheer volume of absentee applications and mail in ballots superseded previous elections significantly.
The settlement agreement changed the signature verification procedure upon receipt of the ballot as I explained above. I didn’t mention that it also created a process where multiple people had to be involved in the verification process which is burdensome given the volume of ballots this year and is also inconsistent with Georgia law.
The fact remains that the settlement agreement changed the manner in which the election was carried out which is unconstitutional.
In today’s Georgia legislative hearing, a constitutional lawyer explained all of this much better than I can. It really is indisputable.
But I guess we shall see if the Constitution will be followed
No but he is the Hillary Swamp Creature who facilitated the payments from the HRC Campaign and the DNC to fund the fake dossier which the FBI used to obtain FISA warrants while not informing the court of the dossier’s origin. This fraud on the court ultimately led to the impeachment of the president.
He’s a peach of a guy.
What's known about surveillance of Trump campaign aides
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a London bar three years ago, a young foreign policy adviser for Donald Trump's campaign told an Australian diplomat something astonishing: Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton...
apnews.com
First off the US Constitution states that... "the states shall elect the president." Therefore, it is within a state's power to alter its election process and signing a consent agreement ascends to exactly that. The agreement merely is subordinate to Georgia law and simply states if signatures do not match as required / agreed then the ballot is further reviewed. Nobody was "overwhelmed" and ballot preocessing wasn't "subverted" in any way. You're also ignoring the two words "on file" which is purposely broad to allow for signatures on other election documents for comparison. These types of assertions have ALL be thrown out by the courts. Move along. There's nothing to see here.
There is no proof or credible evidence Fulton County did any of the things you assert. In fact, I'd be highly skeptical given that Pub & Dee observers were on hand for every step in this election. Folks have to realize that MANY, MANY people would have to be involved in any type of conspiracy to pull off the things asserted by Lying Donnie. In his twisted narcissistic mind that is his "normal" but in the real world it isn't. People talk. Pics get taken. People cannot keep secrets. We would know way before now. The courts all over the country, as well as Trump Baby's OWN Attorney General, have unanimously stated there is no fraud. I realize there are some folks who still believe the Earth is flat but at some point you have to follow the Best Evidence and that means accepting that no creepy things went on no matter what Lying Donnies is telling his followers.
On hand my ass. They sent everyone home. 4 people stayed and pulled out the suitcase to “count” unobserved late night. Video doesn’t lie.
A young girl testified today someone requested and then submitted a mail in ballot with her name within the same day. The procedure you suggest was bypassed. But I’m sure she’s the only one and just one doesn’t change the election right.
Wrong.
The Constitution actually says “Article I, Section 4, Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;
The settlement agreement was not an action of the legislature.
Wrong Again. There are many precedents upholding this very principle, the most recent of which was a Trump win in which the judge decided that the PA Secretary lacked the authority to unilaterally alter the manner in which the election was carried out.
https://www.pennlive.com/elections/...cked-authority-to-extend-ballot-deadline.html
