MovieChat Forums > Politics > The election was rigged

The election was rigged


Why would 50 intelligence officials sign that hunters laptop was russian disinformation right before the election?

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

reply

The New York Post and other media outlets are reporting that the Federal Election Commission has fined both Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee for lying about how they spent money used to pay for the phony Steele dossier on former President Donald Trump. The Clinton campaign and the DNC will be forced to pay $8,000 and $105,000 respectively for labeling payments for the dossier “legal advice and services” rather than opposition research. The money ultimately went to Fusion GPS, the consulting firm that commissioned the dossier, according to FEC documents viewed by the Post. Clinton’s campaign and the DNC together paid more than $1 million combined to the Democrat law firm Perkins Coie, which paid Fusion GPS to dig for dirt on Trump.

Fusion GPS, in turn, hired former British spy Christopher Steele who came up with the phony allegations. Former President Donald Trump says the ruling confirmed his belief that Clinton and the DNC perpetrated a major hoax against his campaign. “This was done to create, as I have stated many times, and is now confirmed, a Hoax funded by the DNC and the Clinton Campaign. This corruption is only beginning to be revealed, is un-American, and must never be allowed to happen again.” Trump’s legal team tells Fox News it is now suing Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Committee and 26 other people and entities for tens of millions of dollars in attorneys fees, damages exceeding $100 million, and “for our democracy.”

reply

Why would Trump appointed judges dismiss his own cases alleging the election was rigged?

reply

Once they get their lifetime appointments they become members of the Deep State, with all the appurtanences, such as a wooden hammer, a black cape, access to the 0.1%, and a new dining room set by Broyhill!

reply

The election was hijacked.

reply

According to you the Democrats outsmarted all you Republicans by rigging the 2020 election involving thousands if not millions of co-conspirators without getting caught. Republicans haven't produced one shred of evidence to prove the election was stolen. Funny, you call Democrats stupid.

reply

I was referring to the 2016 election.

Nancy Pelosi
@SpeakerPelosi
Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts.

I am glad the election was investigated to find out it wasn't hijacked.

reply

I think the biggest factor in the steal were the unconstitutional changes in election laws in the battleground states. What they did was remove all the standing fraud safeguards like signature verification and post mark date deadlines. All verification requirements were tossed out the window. What that did was allow any and all ballots to be shunted through for counting, leaving no way of checking them after they had been removed from the delivery envelope and entered into the count pile. Making truck loads of phony ballot dumps untraceable. That's how they stole it.

reply

Who was driving these trucks again?

reply

https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf

reply

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykBjAHiGQOU

reply

I listened to this and it did not seem like an in depth rebuttal to me. He spends 2 min talking about the insurrection code. Why even bring it up if it's not in the indictment? It's smokescreen. Then he goes on to attack Bill Barr. When he starts talking about the actual 4 counts, he mentioned how one statute originated from the Civil War. Why is that relevant? Smokescreen. Then the origins of the other statutes from 2002 called The Enron Statutes used to help charge for obstruction. Again, why relevant? Smokescreen. Then he goes after Mike Pense and a history lesson about other controversial elections from the 1880's. Smokescreen. Then speaks critically of Jack Smith and Barr again. "Is the president free to publicly dispute election results without being indicted?" Trump was free to do this, he did do this, and he could not accept the results after being told multiple times by his inner circle and various state election officials that there was no evidence of fraud that could have changed the outcome. Then he associated Garland with Obama and Eric Holder as if it's some big conspiracy these people knew each other. Smokescreen. Attacks Jack Smith's record by mentioning cases he lost in the past as if only people with flawless records are worthy of note. Throw in the "the worst radical left wing Obama judge in America." Hyperbole. Then brings up the documents case in FL, a separate indictment with entirely different counts. This amounted to a rant of little substance. Why didn't he mention the supporting content behind the counts, the evidence? I'm guessing because if he knows it's indefensible.

reply

They are smokescreens to you because you are not keeping up with the details surrounding all his points except from left-wing fake news media.

Everything he mentioned was relevant to all his points.

BTW, he was only given 13-mins by the host; he has his own podcasts and video commentaries where he goes into greater details.

About Jack:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230705044442/https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/4/jack-smiths-record-rife-mistrials-overturned-convi/

reply

Maybe you did not comb through it in as much detail as I did.

His only argument is that the statutes do not apply to Trump's indictment because they were originally designed for other things such as Enron executive obstruction and The Civil War.

What if he is wrong? I doubt Smith would charge Trump with statutes that could be thrown out of court on day one. Levin never offered a defense of the individual counts he just called them crap and dropped the paper. That will not work in court.

reply

He does in his audio/video podcasts.

reply

Making truck loads of phony ballot dumps
🤣😂🤣😂🤣

And none of the MAGAS camped out harassing voters could get any evidence of the trucks?

Them Dems pulled of that without leaving a shred of evidence? wowz!
sounds like the plot of a James Bond film ... or Die Hard 3

reply

They said it had the earmarks of Russian intelligence, but weren't completely certain.

It was a tremendous fluke that it actually did turn out to be his laptop.

reply

It was no fluke. They knew and lied about it.

reply