Barr: No evidence of fraud that would change election outcome

[Atomic Dog]

It's sort of hard not to come to that conclusion when there's a mountain of evidence presented and we get back "That doesn't amount to proof". Everything presented is like smoke alarms going off all over the country while you're sitting there saying but I don't see a fire anywhere. All we're saying is lets investigate all these reports and see if there are fires. We clearly see smoke but nobody wants to dive in and see if there are fires present (Fraud).

Do you consider this video proof? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ9YGSMY2xg

If that video is true and what the voiceover is alleging actually happened that would be something serious to investigate. However, it would seem that if there*s all this proof they would*ve won more than one lawsuit out of 40? so either it*s a giant conspiracy involving multiple states And thousands of people, or Trump is just a sore loser and is saving his ego while also making life harder for Biden.

The simplest solution is usually the correct one

[45Doll]

I'd like someone who believes there's no proof AT ALL that this election was stolen to specify exactly what they would accept as 'PROOF'.

Or to invert the argument, who has the PROOF that this election was NOT stolen?

See where that leads you.

“We’re in a situation where we have put together, and you guys did it for our administration…President Obama’s administration before this. We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” Joe Biden

[widgetman101]

If that video is true and what the voiceover is alleging actually happened that would be something serious to investigate. However, it would seem that if there*s all this proof they would*ve won more than one lawsuit out of 40? so either it*s a giant conspiracy involving multiple states And thousands of people, or Trump is just a sore loser and is saving his ego while also making life harder for Biden.

The simplest solution is usually the correct one

I think I'm done with this thread, it's pointless to go back and forth. I will say it's a sad day for America when there are obviously this many brainwashed people that can't look at literally 1,000's of sketchy things going on across multiple states and have half a brain to see that something isn't adding up. Everything Trump has done by turnout and numbers generated results in an election landslide.

My last comment on this, if you can't tell me this isn't strange or worth actually formally investigating just remember if they get away with this now what will they get away with in the future? Source - https://spectator.us/reasons-why-the...eply-puzzling/

To say out-loud that you find the results of the 2020 presidential election odd is to invite derision. You must be a crank or a conspiracy theorist. Mark me down as a crank, then. I am a pollster and I find this election to be deeply puzzling. I also think that the Trump campaign is still well within its rights to contest the tabulations. Something very strange happened in America*s democracy in the early hours of Wednesday November 4 and the days that followed. It*s reasonable for a lot of Americans to want to find out exactly what.

First, consider some facts. President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent. By way of comparison, President Obama was comfortably reelected in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he received in 2008.

Trump*s vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him. He did extraordinarily well with rural male working-class whites.

Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016. Nationally, Joe Biden*s black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.

Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico. Bellwether states swung further in Trump*s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America*s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the Electoral College after winning this trio, and that 1960 defeat to John F. Kennedy is still the subject of great suspicion.

Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump*s direction. Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden*s *winning* margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.

We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.

Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down-ballot coattails; Biden did not. The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a *red wave* in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests. Trump*s party did not lose a single state legislature and actually made gains at the state level.

Another anomaly is found in the comparison between the polls and non-polling metrics. The latter include: party registrations trends; the candidates* respective primary votes; candidate enthusiasm; social media followings; broadcast and digital media ratings; online searches; the number of (especially small) donors; and the number of individuals betting on each candidate.

Despite poor recent performances, media and academic polls have an impressive 80 percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. But, when the polls err, non-polling metrics do not; the latter have a 100 percent record. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump*s reelection. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time; not an impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless.

Atypical voting patterns married with misses by polling and non-polling metrics should give observers pause for thought. Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted.

The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:

1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers

2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio

3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions

4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail-in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures

5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden*s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, *If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election*

6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing

7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard*s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden*s margin is 12,670 votes

8. Serious *chain of custody* breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law

9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden*s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.

[father-of-five]

I'd like someone who believes there's no proof AT ALL that this election was stolen to specify exactly what they would accept as 'PROOF'.

Or to invert the argument, who has the PROOF that this election was NOT stolen?

See where that leads you.

“We’re in a situation where we have put together, and you guys did it for our administration…President Obama’s administration before this. We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” Joe Biden

Hi 45!
It's nice to see you posting on the PA side of the Delaware!

[45Doll]

Hi 45!
It's nice to see you posting on the PA side of the Delaware!

It's nice to be over here periodically. Let's hope it stays that way.

[EWTHeckman]

Thank you. There are some things on there that certainly sound suspicious. Unfortunately none of it amounts to proof.

Smoke wafting under you door, bright red flickering light visible around the edges, and the door being hot to the touch may not be proof by your standards, but if you're not looking for another exit Right F'n NOW based on that much evidence, you're a fool.

[EWTHeckman]

If that video is true and what the voiceover is alleging actually happened that would be something serious to investigate. However, it would seem that if there*s all this proof they would*ve won more than one lawsuit out of 40? so either it*s a giant conspiracy involving multiple states And thousands of people, or Trump is just a sore loser and is saving his ego while also making life harder for Biden.

The simplest solution is usually the correct one

Most have been tossed based on "standing" (aka, "we don't think you should be allowed to bring this suit, so we're not even going to look at the evidence") or "mootness" ("it's already a done deal, nothing can be done about it, so we're not going to try"). None of those are "won" or "lost" on the basis of actual evidence and analysis. They're all kicking the can down the road.

Heck, the recent PA Supreme Court ruling dimissing the Article 77 challenge was similar: "laches", which just means "we think you should have brought the suit sooner, so we're not going to look at it now", even though the doctrine of "standing" requires that an injury must be suffered to have standing, something which was not true before now. In other words, they punted based on a "Catch-22" of "you can't sue right away, or later".

The courts have CLEARLY been taking a "three monkeys" approach, or if you prefer, a Sgt. Shultz approach. That is not how justice works. That is how fraud succeeds.

[icp4life162005]

Most have been tossed based on "standing" (aka, "we don't think you should be allowed to bring this suit, so we're not even going to look at the evidence") or "mootness" ("it's already a done deal, nothing can be done about it, so we're not going to try"). None of those are "won" or "lost" on the basis of actual evidence and analysis. They're all kicking the can down the road.

Heck, the recent PA Supreme Court ruling dimissing the Article 77 challenge was similar: "laches", which just means "we think you should have brought the suit sooner, so we're not going to look at it now", even though the doctrine of "standing" requires that an injury must be suffered to have standing, something which was not true before now. In other words, they punted based on a "Catch-22" of "you can't sue right away, or later".

The courts have CLEARLY been taking a "three monkeys" approach, or if you prefer, a Sgt. Shultz approach. That is not how justice works. That is how fraud succeeds.

People just need to wake up to the reality that if biden/Harris make it to office that the noose has already been tied and lady liberty has been swinging behind the woodshed.

The kangaroo courts are further evidence that the people have been sold out. Next will come the crushing of dissent which has started long ago with the purges and bans occurring at facebook, google, Twitter, etc.

Tiptoeing into tyranny, and nobody bats an eye.

[pyld]

Just like this entire post from you.

The only people called to cure their ballots were blue dems in liberal democrat areas.

Just another democrat showing up and pretending to be the republican arbiter of truth.

Butler County, which trump won 73,023 to 36,534, called people to cure signature mismatches.

Is Butler County a "liberal democrat area?" Daryl Metcalfe would be shocked to know you think so.

[pyld]

Smoke wafting under you door, bright red flickering light visible around the edges, and the door being hot to the touch may not be proof by your standards, but if you're not looking for another exit Right F'n NOW based on that much evidence, you're a fool.

Did you know that "where there is smoke, there is fire" is taught in high schools and colleges throughout the commonwealth as a "Non Sequitur." Does not follow. It's a logical fallacy of debate.

in this case, it's really sidney powell telling you smoke might be wafting under Biden's door, but they can't even state the premise. And that's why this is all largely BS.