Uncompromising Men

[SunTrader]

Watching Biden and Harris about to speak, I’m amused to see all the flag waving, patriotic behavior. I thought liberals deemed flag displays as culturally taboo, racially insensitive and threatening.

Maybe they’ll light them on fire towards the end of the speech as a sign of solidarity with their far fringe constituency.

And I was not at all amused by all the Trumper wingnut pickup truck drivers last couple of months with the Stars and Stripes planted in the bed of their trucks.

Very unpatriotic. The flag is to be displayed on a flagpole, attached to a structure or held by someone such as an honor guard in a parade.

Not flapping in the breeze going down a road - getting rained on, bleached by the sun and otherwise torn to shreds.

And even more unpatriotic displaying along side the treasonous Confederate Battle Flag.

Notice I said Trumper wingnuts not all on the right, just like not all on the left want to burn it either.

 

[BeautifulStranger]

You have the wrong picture.

Try this:

 

[piezoe]

I took notes and posted them in the first post of the thread of what I observed during election night.

OK. Thank you fro clarifying where your "evidence" is coming from. It's already been explained why those reported election returns that you were so concerned about probably are as they are. There is no indication of fraud in those numbers. Millions of people saw the same thing you did, yet you are the only one who noticed an indication of fraud. Amazing!

 

[piezoe]

There is a difference between innuendo and expressing specific indications of election fraud. For For all the seeming blabber and histrionics on this issue, no one has found a way to effectively addess the multiple indications of fraud.

The problem is that what you observed is normal and not an indication of fraud. Your saying it is an indication of fraud doesn't make it so. If there were an obvious indication of fraud Trump campaign lawyers wouldn't be getting all their suits thrown out. If you understood the processing of mail in ballots, which you obviously don't, you would understand there are perfectly reasonable explanations for what you observed, and they don't involve fraud! Furthermore, what you observed is regular and common.

 

[piezoe]

Not one word of what you’ve provided here could be considered a reasonable counterargument

Certainly not to you, but to most other people it is reasonable to assume that you initially have only partial counts of all the mail-in ballots, and as more arrive or are counted, the total number of votes must be updated and hence the percent of total votes reported at that time must be updated as well. This arithmetic is apparently too complex for you to comprehend but nevertheless millions of others can comprehend it.

 

[BeautifulStranger]

The problem is that what you observed is normal and not an indication of fraud. Your saying it is an indication of fraud doesn't make it so. If there were an obvious indication of fraud Trump campaign lawyers wouldn't be getting all their suits thrown out. If you understood the processing of mail in ballots, which you obviously don't, you would understand there are perfectly reasonable explanations for what you observed, and they don't involve fraud! Furthermore, what you observed is regular and common.

The pattern of the progression in the tallying of the votes in Wisconsin was different than the other states. It was plain to see. As far as millions of others not detecting this indictator of fraud at about 4:00 am Eastern time, is it possible that most people were sleeping at this time during a weekday? Is it possible that only a handful, if that, except for me of course, kept track of the metrics I had available to me on paper? Additionallly, there is a electronic record of the progression of the votes in all states, some of which has been posted in this thread and or my “Possible Election Fraud in Progress” thread.

By the way, you saying there isn’t election fraud does not make it so.

Was is more interesting than the indicator of fraud I discovered is the lack of transparency concerning ensuring the integrity of the vote in Wisconsin. Further, partisan trolls has been seeming to work overtime in attempting to deflect legitimate concerns over various fraud indications. It is like it is more important to suppress discussion of that issue than taking the necessary steps to ensure no extra ballots or other method was used to fraudulently change the outcome in Wisconsin. I would have hoped for an above board effort to explain in reasonable detail the causes of the indicators of fraud in what should be the overriding concern to legitimize the election.

There will be a court battle. The outcome and remedies applied, if any, will be based on the evidence and the competence of the plaintiff.

If it were George Bush as the plaintiff instead of Donald Trump, Biden might as well as stay in his basement, assuming of course the multiple indications of fraud are actual fraud.

 

[SunTrader]

Innocent until proven guilty (of fraud for instance) under the law.

Not the other way around.

Absence of fraud does NOT have to be proven.

Proving fraud does or STFU. That is to Chumpie's lawyers. And not to anyone particularly here on ET lol.

Meanwhile his lawyers met today at the Four Seasons Hotel, wow such "fancy digs". No silly not that Four Seasons - in the parking lot of Four Seasons Total Landscaping. LMMFAO

Fitting end for the Bankruptcy Reality TV King

 

[BeautifulStranger]

Innocent until proven guilty (of fraud for instance) under the law.

Not the other way around.

Absence of fraud does NOT have to be proven.

Proving fraud does or STFU. That is to Chumpie's lawyers. And not to anyone particularly here on ET lol.

Meanwhile his lawyers met today at the Four Seasons Hotel, wow such "fancy digs". No silly not that Four Seasons - in the parking lot of Four Seasons Total Landscaping. LMMFAO

Fitting end for the Bankruptcy Reality TV King

I presume you are responding to my post. You, with a quite a few other Leftist poster seem uncharacteristically uptight considering you guys said you’ve won. So uptight, you guys are often reading things into factual posts that just are not there.

From my post above:

There will be a court battle. The outcome and remedies applied, if any, will be based on the evidence and the competence of the plaintiff.

What is hard to understand about this?

 

[Frederick Foresight]

In Pennsylvania, the elected officials - all of which are democrat in Philly. The person who defied the court order is on record for several times making very public comments about the defeat of Trump. If you want transparency (which is what we are talking about), then this really looks bad. That's all I'm saying.

Again, that's if you care to consider it. I'm aware most of you don't.

Watching 60 Minutes right now, about this very issue. You sources are FOS. Completely mischaracterized. There were always observers. They were ten feet away, but they wanted to be even closer to where the envelopes were. So they protested and were moved to only 6 feet away. Meanwhile Trump was talking about binoculars.

The interviewee said he received multiple death threats. He was told by one caller that the second amendment was made for these situations; it was made for him. He said he didn’t understand why he was being threatened for counting votes in a democracy. Maybe you can explain it to him.

 

[Cuddles]

Watching 60 Minutes right now, about this very issue. You sources are FOS. Completely mischaracterized.

This was settled back in the 1st page:

COOOOPPPPEEEE