Well , hell Hitler approved of the gas ovens at the concentration camps, he also used the hell out of them! So Kemp approved of and bought them knowing they are capable of being tampered with and manipulated, but no votes were ever altered. Sure!
Excerpt from report on Georgia voting machine lawsuit.
- Thread starter Whosyodawgy
- Start date
That is interesting and also a reason why he would not want the vulnerability to be exposed.
Indeed, Ruby Freeman does say hello. She and Shaye Moss just settled another defamation case. I bet this will add a tidy sum to the $150m Rudy owes them.Ruby Freeman says hello, but only if you’re black.
HOLY MOLEY! Video Released Showing Georgia's Ruby Freeman Saying She Doesn't Want to Talk with “WHITE GUYS” | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe and Jim Hoft
This post was originally posted at JoeHoft.com.www.thegatewaypundit.com
That response is and typical and frustrating. Everyone should want every citizen to have confidence in our system. Currently millions of citizen do not trust the system. Don’t see libs wanting a better system. Unless maybe if Trump wins. If a bad actor at the county level can manipulate the votes, isn’t it highly likely that it will occur. Or at least isn’t it reasonable for folks distrust ? Also isn’t it likely the smoking gun could be extremely difficult to find. Especially when you have places like Fulton County fighting to only allow their cronies near the ballots. And yes I’m sure pub precincts do the same. Sadly libs love the vulnerabilities. Hell they don’t even want voter rolls cleaned up. Total bullshit to make claims 2020 was the most secure election ever. Truth is, at best, no one knows.
Last edited:
Millions of people don’t trust the system because Trump and the GOP have been lying about election fraud for five years.
The system is so vulnerable that the 2020 election was the most scrutinized election in our history by likely a factor of 10x or more and they didn’t find a single case of meaningful election fraud, anywhere. So is it really that bad of a system, and if you suggest that it is, what do you base that off of? It certainly isn’t based on previous cases of elections fraud.
Last edited:
Senators demand to know why election vendors still sell voting machines with ‘known vulnerabilities’
Four senior senators have called on the largest U.S. voting machine makers to explain why they continue to sell devices with “known vulnerabilities,” ahead of upcoming critical elections. The letter, sent Wednesday, calls on election equipment makers ES&S, Dominion Voting and Hart InterCivic to...
www.klobuchar.senate.gov
Loading…
www.americanprogress.org
Democrats more likely to be concerned about election security than Republicans, poll finds
Two years ago, it was Republicans who were more concerned about the integrity of the election. This year, it's Democrats.
www.pbs.org
Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’
Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...
Here is a history below of all the times democrats have questioned election integrity
Loading…
www.washingtontimes.com
Yes, just as there are no guilty persons in prison! They are not going to uncover and admit their cheating. I thought you were smarter than that
Yes, you are correct. Why did Kemp and Rafflesberger (sp?) get a huge kickback from China after purchasing the dominion voting machines from them?
he also got a huge kickback from China after buying them. It is not red vs blue as stated by others here. It is American citizens vs. the government ( on all levels) from local all the way to the federal government.
"[Russell Berman of The Atlantic] talks to former House majority whip and outgoing assistant Democratic leader James Clyburn, who voted against certifying George W. Bush’s victory in 2004; Senate candidate Adam Schiff, who abstained rather than vote to certify Bush that same year; Zoe Lofgren, who did the same; Jamie Raskin, who objected to certifying Trump’s victory in 2016; and Eric Swalwell. None of them would commit to certify electors for Trump, even if it was clear that Trump won. He could not get a response from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jefferies, who repeatedly claimed after 2016 that Trump was not a “legitimate president.” As Berman notes, every House Democrat voted for the 2021 articles of impeachment of Trump for “incitement of insurrection,” and many of them still contend that he is an insurrectionist ineligible for the presidency."Senators demand to know why election vendors still sell voting machines with ‘known vulnerabilities’
Four senior senators have called on the largest U.S. voting machine makers to explain why they continue to sell devices with “known vulnerabilities,” ahead of upcoming critical elections. The letter, sent Wednesday, calls on election equipment makers ES&S, Dominion Voting and Hart InterCivic to...www.klobuchar.senate.gov
Loading…
www.americanprogress.org
Democrats more likely to be concerned about election security than Republicans, poll finds
Two years ago, it was Republicans who were more concerned about the integrity of the election. This year, it's Democrats.
Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’
Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...www.yahoo.com
Here is a history below of all the times democrats have questioned election integrity
Loading…
www.washingtontimes.com
Full article, Democrats May Refuse to Certify a Trump Election If He Wins. The Supreme Court Could Prevent That, National Review
It is a blind spot for democrats. I swear they believe Trump is the only one to ever question an election. Biden was threatened if he certified Trump as the president. People forget all the silliness that Hillary did after her defeat. Al gore lost his mind too.
"We have reviewed our own work and found ourselves to be correct. No, you can't see any of it."
What’s the number of cases, civil or criminal, where significant fraud was proven in court?
Now, what’s the number of instances where the people who were lying about election fraud have been proven in either civil or criminal court to be lying about election fraud? How many disbarments? How much in civil penalties?
How is the public interest served by keeping data secret, destroying public records and weakening controls?
Are you worried Shonuff that you are not going to get enough illegal votes to win?
Well if you are going to hire an expert on cheating, go to Auburn University. Well played.
One thing I would like to know from the election conspiracists is how Kemp won and Trump didn't on those same ballots. If the Democrats were going to systematically cheat, why did they allow Kemp to win?
One thing I would like to know from the election conspiracists is how Kemp won and Trump didn't on those same ballots. If the Democrats were going to systematically cheat, why did they allow Kemp to win?
The short answer is that it isn't a Red Team vs. Blue Team issue. It is an Us vs. Them issue.
People get caught up in the team sport aspect and never make it to holding government accountable. Half the people are going to defend the system, no matter how corrupt, if their favorite team wins.
Concerns about data, public records and controls appear disingenuous when they originate from people who made outrageous claims of wide scale fraud based on lies about evidence that they never had.
So I’ll ask again, do you feel that these issues with data, public records and controls resulted in Biden winning in 2020 when Trump was actually the one who received the most legitimate votes? That’s what JD Vance suggested yesterday, so I’m curious regarding your thoughts on the matter.
It was wide enough to determine the outcome of an election. The evidence has been covered up, kind of like the Kennedy assassination. You know darn well there was voter fraud and vote tampering.
I do believe the brain dead, beach lounger was not the legitimate winner of the 2020 election. Kamala does the near impossible and makes him look smarter!
The systems we use do not reliably tell us the results of elections. That's my thought on the matter.
My background is in management information and control systems. Since retiring, I have been more involved working on elections and monitoring election processes.
I've shown many examples and spent hours trying to explain the obvious weaknesses in our election systems, not secret plots but observable weaknesses. All to be dismissed with the wave of a hand by people who have no idea what really happens behind the ballot box - and don't want to know as long as their team wins.
The process is a lot softer, and involves a lot more subjective decisions (which should not be subjective at all) than most people realize. Standard data benchmarks are ignored rather than being used to improve the system.
If you and I were accused of a crime, we wouldn't be able to tell investigators that they couldn't enter the suspicious room in the house that wreaks of decomposing flesh and has a syrupy dark liquid oozing under the door. Why should we allow government to treat the public record this way?
Businesses who want their stock traded in the public market have accounting and reporting standards they have to meet. Internal review is not sufficient. They are required to submit annually to professional third party review. There's a set of published standards that the reviews are measured against. Why would we expect any less from a highly manipulatable process like elections?
Last edited:
