2020 General Election

[SeattleGriz]

While not rampant, this video proves the same batch of ballots were scanned multiple times in Georgia. I would have to say to those that keep saying, "show me the fraud", don't realize it is now 8 months after the election before investigators could even get to a point to prove fraud.

https://rumble.com/vjswgn-fulton-county ... times.html

Fraud committed filling out tally sheets during the Georgia audit.

https://rumble.com/vjsyl3-fulton-county ... llots.html

[JohnStOnge]

While not rampant, this video proves the same batch of ballots were scanned multiple times in Georgia. I would have to say to those that keep saying, "show me the fraud", don't realize it is now 8 months after the election before investigators could even get to a point to prove fraud.

https://rumble.com/vjswgn-fulton-county ... times.html

Fraud committed filling out tally sheets during the Georgia audit.

https://rumble.com/vjsyl3-fulton-county ... llots.html

You are believing a questionable source because it tells you what you want to hear.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/rumble/

[JohnStOnge]

https://www.reuters.com/legal/governmen ... 021-07-12/

I think the Washington Post article on this is probably better but I'm not paying subscription.

Judge eyes sanctions on pro-Trump lawyers who claimed voter fraud

But she spent a large portion of the hearing grilling Powell and the other attorneys on whether they vetted affidavits claiming voter fraud in Michigan before filing them in federal court.

"I don't think I've ever seen an affidavit that makes so many leaps. This is really fantastical," Parker said. "So my question to counsel here is: How could any of you as officers of the court present this affidavit?"

[JohnStOnge]

While not rampant, this video proves the same batch of ballots were scanned multiple times in Georgia. I would have to say to those that keep saying, "show me the fraud", don't realize it is now 8 months after the election before investigators could even get to a point to prove fraud.

https://rumble.com/vjswgn-fulton-county ... times.html

Fraud committed filling out tally sheets during the Georgia audit.

https://rumble.com/vjsyl3-fulton-county ... llots.html

Second post on this. Really SG, you need to break free of the questionable sources. You have no idea as to what you are looking at in those videos. What they are showing could have perfectly reasonable explanations if one were to interview election officials and allow them to respond to what is being alleged. It is a fringe extreme right wing site with a reputation for misleading people. I recommend you use something like mediabiasfactcheck.com and stick to sources that have at LEAST a "mixed" factual reporting rating.

[SeattleGriz]

While not rampant, this video proves the same batch of ballots were scanned multiple times in Georgia. I would have to say to those that keep saying, "show me the fraud", don't realize it is now 8 months after the election before investigators could even get to a point to prove fraud.

https://rumble.com/vjswgn-fulton-county ... times.html

Fraud committed filling out tally sheets during the Georgia audit.

https://rumble.com/vjsyl3-fulton-county ... llots.html

You are believing a questionable source because it tells you what you want to hear.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/rumble/

They have video proof dude. How is that biased? In the one video they show you multiple instances in which a ballot was counted twice. In the other, they show you inaccurate audit logs. Rumble is a video platform like YouTube.

Did you not see the video of the Georgia election workers scanning the ballots multiple times? This double/triple scanning video has made the rounds for quite awhile.

Lastly, your website is a joke. The guy who runs it is a loon. You need to search for media bias fact check bias to see how the guy is savaged by those who understand bias. When your site is savaged by Wikipedia, you know you have a problem.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check

[Skjellyfetti]

TRUMP, claiming that a Fulton County election worker fed ballots through a machine three times instead of only once, saying his campaign would release a video proving it: “It can’t be disputed. We have a version that you haven’t seen, but it’s magnified. It’s magnified and you can see everything. For some reason, they put it in three times each ballot. And I don’t know why, I don’t know why three times and not five times, right?”

THE FACTS: There was no double or triple tallying of ballots. Raffensperger noted that ballots in Georgia have been counted and then recounted twice more for accuracy, including once by hand, and no discrepancy showed up in the Fulton County ballots, as it would have if someone improperly counted votes multiple times. “We did an audit of that,” Raffensperger told Trump. “It was proved conclusively that they were not scanned three times.”

https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-chec ... 885f7dafa9

[SeattleGriz]

TRUMP, claiming that a Fulton County election worker fed ballots through a machine three times instead of only once, saying his campaign would release a video proving it: “It can’t be disputed. We have a version that you haven’t seen, but it’s magnified. It’s magnified and you can see everything. For some reason, they put it in three times each ballot. And I don’t know why, I don’t know why three times and not five times, right?”

THE FACTS: There was no double or triple tallying of ballots. Raffensperger noted that ballots in Georgia have been counted and then recounted twice more for accuracy, including once by hand, and no discrepancy showed up in the Fulton County ballots, as it would have if someone improperly counted votes multiple times. “We did an audit of that,” Raffensperger told Trump. “It was proved conclusively that they were not scanned three times.”

https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-chec ... 885f7dafa9

This audit was just completed, showing the audit you reference had a couple of whoopsies. Your article is from January by the way.

[SeattleGriz]

After the Maricopa audit, the numbers counted don't match what was reported by the election. How much they differ has not been released.

[CID1990]

After the Maricopa audit, the numbers counted don't match what was reported by the election. How much they differ has not been released.

There has never, in the history of American democracy, been a state or national election where the election vote counts have matched the audits. Ever.

The “steal” narrative is tenuously supported by circumstantial evidence, composed of contemporary realities that have always existed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

After the Maricopa audit, the numbers counted don't match what was reported by the election. How much they differ has not been released.

There has never, in the history of American democracy, been a state or national election where the election vote counts have matched the audits. Ever.

The “steal” narrative is tenuously supported by circumstantial evidence, composed of contemporary realities that have always existed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand that and understand I'm being a troll here.

By the way, the audit completed in Maricopa right after the election turned up 100% accurate. Hand count exactly matched machine count. True story. I realize you did specify state or national and not county. Just thought it was curious.

[CID1990]

There has never, in the history of American democracy, been a state or national election where the election vote counts have matched the audits. Ever.

The “steal” narrative is tenuously supported by circumstantial evidence, composed of contemporary realities that have always existed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand that and understand I'm being a troll here.

By the way, the audit completed in Maricopa right after the election turned up 100% accurate. Hand count exactly matched machine count. True story. I realize you did specify state or national and not county. Just thought it was curious.

That IS why I said state or national.

Welcome to the world of dealing with semantic anklebiters like Felchy

You have to parse your facts carefully


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

While not rampant, this video proves the same batch of ballots were scanned multiple times in Georgia. I would have to say to those that keep saying, "show me the fraud", don't realize it is now 8 months after the election before investigators could even get to a point to prove fraud.

https://rumble.com/vjswgn-fulton-county ... times.html

Fraud committed filling out tally sheets during the Georgia audit.

https://rumble.com/vjsyl3-fulton-county ... llots.html

Second post on this. Really SG, you need to break free of the questionable sources. You have no idea as to what you are looking at in those videos. What they are showing could have perfectly reasonable explanations if one were to interview election officials and allow them to respond to what is being alleged. It is a fringe extreme right wing site with a reputation for misleading people. I recommend you use something like mediabiasfactcheck.com and stick to sources that have at LEAST a "mixed" factual reporting rating.

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

[kalm]

Second post on this. Really SG, you need to break free of the questionable sources. You have no idea as to what you are looking at in those videos. What they are showing could have perfectly reasonable explanations if one were to interview election officials and allow them to respond to what is being alleged. It is a fringe extreme right wing site with a reputation for misleading people. I recommend you use something like mediabiasfactcheck.com and stick to sources that have at LEAST a "mixed" factual reporting rating.

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

From same article:

“The discovery of identical ballots provides evidence to back up allegations of problems in the presidential election, but on a relatively small scale that had no bearing on the final certified count. A group of voters seeking to prove the election was fraudulent say double-counting is just the beginning of what they hope to find.”

Kanye West nearly pulled off the fraud!

[SeattleGriz]

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

From same article:

“The discovery of identical ballots provides evidence to back up allegations of problems in the presidential election, but on a relatively small scale that had no bearing on the final certified count. A group of voters seeking to prove the election was fraudulent say double-counting is just the beginning of what they hope to find.”

Kanye West nearly pulled off the fraud!

Oh I read that, but this was a small batch. Remember, we were told that double/triple scanning did NOT happen. Funny how the goalposts are moved by the AJC.

Okay, double/triple scanning did happen, but not much.

[Ibanez]

Second post on this. Really SG, you need to break free of the questionable sources. You have no idea as to what you are looking at in those videos. What they are showing could have perfectly reasonable explanations if one were to interview election officials and allow them to respond to what is being alleged. It is a fringe extreme right wing site with a reputation for misleading people. I recommend you use something like mediabiasfactcheck.com and stick to sources that have at LEAST a "mixed" factual reporting rating.

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

I really want to read this but can't. All I saw is that Kanye West got more votes than he should have .

[SeattleGriz]

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

I really want to read this but can't. All I saw is that Kanye West got more votes than he should have .

[JohnStOnge]

You are believing a questionable source because it tells you what you want to hear.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/rumble/

They have video proof dude. How is that biased? In the one video they show you multiple instances in which a ballot was counted twice. In the other, they show you inaccurate audit logs. Rumble is a video platform like YouTube.

Did you not see the video of the Georgia election workers scanning the ballots multiple times? This double/triple scanning video has made the rounds for quite awhile.

Lastly, your website is a joke. The guy who runs it is a loon. You need to search for media bias fact check bias to see how the guy is savaged by those who understand bias. When your site is savaged by Wikipedia, you know you have a problem.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check

First, I think the Wikipedia article is kind of a split. It implies that the Columbia Journalism Review and the Poynter Institute say it's unreliable while it says the University of Michigan and MIT have used it as a source. Second, it wasn't the Columbia Journalism Review as an institution that they referenced and the Poynter Institute did not say the site is unreliable. I found the two referenced pieces. They referenced an editorial by a free lance journalist that appeared on the Columbia Journalism Review (https://www.cjr.org/innovations/measure ... rtisan.php) and a discussion of Fact Checking at the Poynter Institute page (https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2 ... g-in-2019/).

[JohnStOnge]

Second post on this. Really SG, you need to break free of the questionable sources. You have no idea as to what you are looking at in those videos. What they are showing could have perfectly reasonable explanations if one were to interview election officials and allow them to respond to what is being alleged. It is a fringe extreme right wing site with a reputation for misleading people. I recommend you use something like mediabiasfactcheck.com and stick to sources that have at LEAST a "mixed" factual reporting rating.

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

I saw the AJC article earlier today. It indicates that, as Kalm kind of already indicated ,that double scanning incident had no bearing on the final certified count. It was not intentional. It was an error. There is always some error. You can verify that in your own mind by thinking about recounts. Recounts NEVER exactly match initial counts.

The system in place eliminated the error. There is no evidence of voter fraud. And there is no evidence that somebody sat there and double scanned ballots at a single sitting.

The web site you posted misled people by leaving out all of the context. They presented it as though something nefarious was going on. That is not what the AJC article says. The AJC article indicates that someone accidentally double scanned ballots but it had no impact on the final certified tally because of the recount process. It does not at all suggest that there was any fraud or intentional misconduct. It does not validate the allegations made in repots from crackpot institutions like One America News Network that workers sat there and intentionally scanned batches of ballots multiple times.

[SeattleGriz]

Here you go. From the Left leaning AJC. See, my links are validated by the Lefty rag. I'll say you really need to do a better job of understanding media. Your reflexive jump to the dubious media bias fact check website before even reading what is posted shows a very narrow mind.

It's what led you to be suckered into multiple incorrect narratives over the last 5 years.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/some-ballo ... KIDNIOYV4/

I saw the AJC article earlier today. It indicates that, as Kalm kind of already indicated ,that double scanning incident had no bearing on the final certified count. It was not intentional. It was an error. There is always some error. You can verify that in your own mind by thinking about recounts. Recounts NEVER exactly match initial counts.

The system in place eliminated the error. There is no evidence of voter fraud. And there is no evidence that somebody sat there and double scanned ballots at a single sitting.

The web site you posted misled people by leaving out all of the context. They presented it as though something nefarious was going on. That is not what the AJC article says. The AJC article indicates that someone accidentally double scanned ballots but it had no impact on the final certified tally because of the recount process. It does not at all suggest that there was any fraud or intentional misconduct. It does not validate the allegations made in repots from crackpot institutions like One America News Network that workers sat there and intentionally scanned batches of ballots multiple times.

Nice downplaying of a problem we were told didn't exist. As seen below in the quote, there were 36 batches of "little mistakes" for a vote increase of 3,400 for Joe Biden. This was just one county.

The analysis turned up at least 36 batches of mail-in ballots, containing 4,255 votes, that were added redundantly to the audit results, Voters Organized for Trusted Election Results in Georgia (VoterGA), charged. Nearly 3,400 were for Democrat Joe Biden

I suppose the below statement also fits nicely into your belief little errors happen.

The analysis revealed that 923 (60 percent) of the 1,539 mail-in ballot batch files contained votes that were incorrectly reported in the county’s official 2020 election result compared to the audit totals, according to VoterGA.

Georgia needs a full forensic audit.

[SDHornet]

From same article:

“The discovery of identical ballots provides evidence to back up allegations of problems in the presidential election, but on a relatively small scale that had no bearing on the final certified count. A group of voters seeking to prove the election was fraudulent say double-counting is just the beginning of what they hope to find.”

Kanye West nearly pulled off the fraud!

Oh I read that, but this was a small batch. Remember, we were told that double/triple scanning did NOT happen. Funny how the goalposts are moved by the AJC.

Okay, double/triple scanning did happen, but not much.

Time for a forensic audit in Georgia. Maybe Biden* can travel there and make more Jim Crow/Civil War speeches.

[SeattleGriz]

Oh I read that, but this was a small batch. Remember, we were told that double/triple scanning did NOT happen. Funny how the goalposts are moved by the AJC.

Okay, double/triple scanning did happen, but not much.

Time for a forensic audit in Georgia. Maybe Biden* can travel there and make more Jim Crow/Civil War speeches.

I'm interested to see what AZ Senate leader Karen Fann has to say about the Arizona audit tomorrow morning on the webcast, especially now that the Dems are going to investigate the auditors. Should have done that back in the beginning when anyone and everyone was invited to participate, but they chose not to.

[kalm]

Oh I read that, but this was a small batch. Remember, we were told that double/triple scanning did NOT happen. Funny how the goalposts are moved by the AJC.

Okay, double/triple scanning did happen, but not much.

Time for a forensic audit in Georgia. Maybe Biden* can travel there and make more Jim Crow/Civil War speeches.

Holy shit! Well if Tucker says it...

They should rush this to the courts!

[Ivytalk]

Tucker Carlson is the Rachel Madcow of the right. Without the lesbian part.

[SeattleGriz]

Interesting. Seems the MCBOS wants to replace voting machines inspected by the current audit, because they are not certified by the EAC.

None of the firms MCBOS chose for their audits were certified at the time they were chosen for their audit, and only became certified AFTER it was pointed out they weren't current. Both firms had let their certifications expire.

Well, now it seems they have evidence the MCBOS used one of these firms (Pro V&V) in 2019, while it's certification was expired.

You know what that means don't you? The machines the uncertified firm touched, were tarnished back in 2019.

Can't make this shit up. This whole fiasco is going pretty much how I expected and have stated. Our elections are run by bureaucratic boobs.

[kalm]

Interesting. Seems the MCBOS wants to replace voting machines inspected by the current audit, because they are not certified by the EAC.

None of the firms MCBOS chose for their audits were certified at the time they were chosen for their audit, and only became certified AFTER it was pointed out they weren't current. Both firms had let their certifications expire.

Well, now it seems they have evidence the MCBOS used one of these firms (Pro V&V) in 2019, while it's certification was expired.

You know what that means don't you? The machines the uncertified firm touched, were tarnished back in 2019.

Can't make this shit up. This whole fiasco is going pretty much how I expected and have stated. Our elections are run by bureaucratic boobs.

Trump’s victory in 2016 is clearly now in question. As are the Republican gains in the house last year.