In article <67119743$4$2758$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 17, 2024 at 3:58:28 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> <6711967e$5$3826$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
> > In article <67118ce8$1$2873018$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> > brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Oct 17, 2024 at 3:00:38 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >> <671188f1$0$3829$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>
> >>> In article <671180d7$0$1895500$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 17, 2024 at 2:14:18 PM MST, "pothead" wrote
> >>>> <verun9$2tegq$1@dont-email.me>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 2024-10-17, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> In article <671175b5$2$2873000$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Oct 17, 2024 at 1:36:21 PM MST, "pothead" wrote
> >>>>>>> <versg5$2stfd$2@dont-email.me>:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2024-10-17, P. Coonan <nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 17 Oct 2024, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> posted some
> >>>>>>>>> news:1lj2hjdh81bp6l51k7lm780n4mld88clag@4ax.com:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This shouldn't be a surprise. Even to the morons at msnbc.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 'MSNBC Interviews Early Voters In Key Battleground State, Struggles To
> >>>>>>>>>> Find Anyone Who Voted For Harris'
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> <https://dailycaller.com/2024/10/16/msnbc-arizona-early-voting-kamala-harris/>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 'NBC News correspondent Vaughn Hillyard said Wednesday that not one
> >>>>>>>>>> early voter interviewed by his team in the battleground state of
> >>>>>>>>>> Arizona admitted they were voting for Vice President Kamala Harris.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Republicans are voting by mail or returning their ballots early at a
> >>>>>>>>>> two-to-one margin over Democrats, though Democrats outpaced
> >>>>>>>>>> Republicans with early voting in 2020, Hillyard said on ?Jose-Diaz
> >>>>>>>>>> Balart Reports.? Not a single voter lining up at the polling
> >>>>>>>>>> locations in Mohave County openly said they were voting for Harris,
> >>>>>>>>>> the NBC correspondent added.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ?We went to a couple early voting locations, and we saw lengthy
> >>>>>>>>>> lines during the lunch hour. Thirty people waiting in line, and we
> >>>>>>>>>> should note, we did not find a single person who audibly would tell us
> >>>>>>>>>> that they voted for Kamala Harris,? Hillyard said. ?These were
> >>>>>>>>>> Trump supporters getting out to vote early in the all-important Mohave
> >>>>>>>>>> County.?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> WATCH:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> One supporter of Republican nominee Donald Trump named Jim Coddington
> >>>>>>>>>> said that voters are making a ?special effort? to vote this year
> >>>>>>>>>> and that it is important for those to come out early. Shelley Schwarz,
> >>>>>>>>>> a voter in Mohave County, said she voted early for the first time ever
> >>>>>>>>>> because Trump encouraged voters to do so. (RELATED: Democrats?
> >>>>>>>>>> Championing Of Early Voting Could Come Back To Haunt Them)
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ?He keeps saying it, and I?ve been thinking about it, and so here
> >>>>>>>>>> I am,? Schwarz said.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Another voter said he did not vote in 2020 but voted early in 2024
> >>>>>>>>>> because he is ?horrified by the state of the country,? Hillyard
> >>>>>>>>>> said. Three other voters he spoke to said they moved to Arizona from
> >>>>>>>>>> blue states to support Trump.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Trump is currently ahead in Arizona, 49% to 47%, according to The New
> >>>>>>>>>> York Times. President Joe Biden narrowly won the state in 2020 by less
> >>>>>>>>>> than one point, 49.4% to 49.1%, while the former president won the
> >>>>>>>>>> state against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 49.5% to 45.4%
> >>>>>>>>>> in 2016
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We're going to see a repeat of the Hillary Clinton chokefest and shocked
> >>>>>>>>> expressions on CBS talking heads.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I sure hope so, however the demoncrats have been plotting their
> >>>>>>>> cheating methods for 4 years so who knows what they have up their
> >>>>>>>> sleeves this time.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Where do you get these wild stories?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Stay blind.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And stupid as well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *Just a few anomalies regarding the 2020 election.*
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. Six states changed their election laws two months before the 2020
> >>>>> election by executive fiat, instead of going through the proper channels
> >>>>> in the legislature. That is a violation of their state constitutions and
> >>>>> that in and of itself is enough to invalidate the results of the 2020
> >>>>> election.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. Mark Zuckerberg, hard left, spent $450 million dollars of private
> >>>>> money on our elections. After the 2020 election analysis revealed that
> >>>>> most of that money went to benefit Democrats.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 3. 6 swing states stopped counting the votes on election night for the
> >>>>> first time in American history. At the time that they stopped counting
> >>>>> the votes, Donald Trump was ahead of Biden in each of them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 4. The unelected tech oligarchs in conjunction with the FBI in this
> >>>>> country censored a very important story about Hunter Biden?s laptop and
> >>>>> Joe Biden?s corruption. People who worked in the intelligence community,
> >>>>> came out and said it was Russian disinformation only to have that laptop
> >>>>> be admitted into evidence as part of an FBI investigation and criminal
> >>>>> prosecution of Hunter Biden. Polling after the election showed that if
> >>>>> people knew about the Hunter Biden laptop story it would?ve changed 17%
> >>>>> of the vote.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 5. 2,036,041 ballots were touched by anomalies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 6. 923 American citizens filled out affidavits alleging voter fraud, and
> >>>>> signed them under penalties of perjury.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 7. 50 plus courts blocked evidentiary hearings into the alleged fraud
> >>>>> found in 2020.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 8. Prior to 2020 there were four other contested elections, one in
> >>>>> Florida, one in the 78th district of Missouri, one in the ninth district
> >>>>> of North Carolina, and one in the 22nd district of New York. In every
> >>>>> single one of those four instances, there was an evidentiary hearing. In
> >>>>> the 2020 election, there was no evidentiary hearing. For the first time
> >>>>> in American history.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 9. No election contest in American history has had 923 fact witnesses
> >>>>> sign under penalties of perjury and stake their personal freedom in
> >>>>> testimony to attest to the irregularities and legal issues found in
> >>>>> various states.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 10. 37 states in the United States of America altered their absentee or
> >>>>> mail in ballots ballot integrity procedures before the 2020 election.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 11. If those 37 states used the same ballot integrity procedures that
> >>>>> they used in 2018, swing states would?ve found an upwards of 30,000 more
> >>>>> ineligible ballots.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 12. In Pennsylvania, counties allowed new ballots to be filled out after
> >>>>> the election.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 13. Any one of those is enough to say that there was enough fraud in the
> >>>>> 2020 election to doubt the outcome. Can I prove Donald Trump would?ve
> >>>>> won the election if the Democrats hadn?t cheated? No I can?t prove a
> >>>>> counter-narrative, but I can tell you that this amount of fraud leads
> >>>>> any reasonable person to the conclusion that Joe Biden didn?t win.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The insurrection therefore was on 11/3/2020.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1/6 was a lawful protest with permits that got out of hand. Unlike
> >>>>> Democrats who spent 10 months burning down this country to the tune of
> >>>>> $2 billion dollars, and injuring 740 police officers nationwide, the
> >>>>> capital riot had a couple million dollars in damages, 140 police
> >>>>> officers that were injured and zero deaths. Except the 3 Trump
> >>>>> supporters who were unarmed and killed without any investigation by the
> >>>>> corrupt government.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anybody who is clutching their pearls about January 6 without mentioning
> >>>>> the fact that there was a large federal presence and many anomalies that
> >>>>> have yet to be answered is a liar and a partisan hack.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You sound like an uninformed stage 10 TDS patient who needs to detox
> >>>>> from CNN and MSNBC.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You can endorse the cackling communist from California, but..don?t you
> >>>>> dare pretend like the reason why you?re doing it is because Donald Trump
> >>>>> did something wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let?s break down and address these claims one by one:
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 1: States changing election laws by executive fiat
> >>>>
> >>>> It?s true that some states changed voting procedures before the 2020 election
> >>>> due to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly to expand access to mail-in voting.
> >>>> However, these changes were largely made through emergency powers or by state
> >>>> election boards and officials, often with judicial review. In most cases, the
> >>>> courts ruled these changes were legal under state constitutions. Even in
> >>>> states where the legality was questioned, no court invalidated the election
> >>>> results based solely on these procedural changes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 2: Mark Zuckerberg spent $450 million to benefit Democrats
> >>>>
> >>>> Mark Zuckerberg and his wife donated to a non-partisan group, the Center for
> >>>> Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), which provided funds to help local election
> >>>> offices run elections during the pandemic. While some of the funds went to
> >>>> areas that leaned Democrat (which are often more populous), Republican-leaning
> >>>> areas also received funds. There?s no evidence that this funding was used to
> >>>> favor one party over another.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 3: 6 swing states stopped counting votes on election night
> >>>>
> >>>> In 2020, due to the unprecedented number of mail-in ballots, some states did
> >>>> stop counting votes temporarily on election night. This wasn?t a unique event
> >>>> in history?vote counting has often extended beyond election night in previous
> >>>> elections, especially in states with close races. Mail-in ballots take longer
> >>>> to process, and the delays were expected and announced beforehand. Trump?s
> >>>> early lead in some states was due to the ?red mirage? phenomenon, where
> >>>> same-day in-person votes (which leaned Republican) were counted first,
> >>>> followed by mail-in ballots (which leaned Democrat).
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 4: Hunter Biden laptop story and censorship
> >>>>
> >>>> The Hunter Biden laptop story was published just weeks before the 2020
> >>>> election. Some media outlets and social media platforms took steps to limit
> >>>> its distribution, citing concerns about the authenticity of the information
> >>>> and potential foreign interference. While subsequent investigations confirmed
> >>>> that the laptop was part of a legitimate investigation into Hunter Biden,
> >>>> there is no evidence that the suppression of this story changed the election
> >>>> outcome. Polls suggesting otherwise are speculative.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 5: 2 million ballots touched by anomalies
> >>>>
> >>>> This claim is vague and lacks concrete evidence. Many claims about voting
> >>>> anomalies have been thoroughly investigated, and none have shown widespread
> >>>> fraud that would alter the outcome of the election. Anomalies are common in
> >>>> every election, but they are generally clerical or minor errors that do not
> >>>> affect the overall result.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 6: 923 affidavits alleging voter fraud
> >>>>
> >>>> While it?s true that some people signed affidavits, affidavits are not proof
> >>>> of fraud?they are simply statements by individuals. Many of these affidavits
> >>>> were dismissed by courts due to lack of evidence or because they described
> >>>> misunderstandings of normal election processes. Simply filing an affidavit
> >>>> does not prove fraud.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 7: 50+ courts blocked evidentiary hearings
> >>>>
> >>>> Many courts rejected election fraud claims because the evidence presented was
> >>>> insufficient or non-existent. Courts didn?t block hearings out of bias but
> >>>> rather followed legal standards that require concrete evidence before
> >>>> proceeding. Most cases were dismissed because they didn?t meet the burden of
> >>>> proof.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 8: No evidentiary hearing for the 2020 election
> >>>>
> >>>> There were numerous hearings and legal challenges related to the 2020
> >>>> election, including in key states like Georgia, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. In
> >>>> most cases, judges found no credible evidence of widespread fraud. The idea
> >>>> that there was ?no evidentiary hearing? is false.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 9: 923 fact witnesses signed under perjury
> >>>>
> >>>> While hundreds of people may have signed affidavits, it?s important to note
> >>>> that many of these affidavits were dismissed by courts due to a lack of
> >>>> supporting evidence. An affidavit alone does not constitute proof, and many
> >>>> were based on misunderstandings or hearsay rather than direct knowledge of
> >>>> fraud.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 10: 37 states altered absentee or mail-in ballot procedures
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, many states made adjustments to their mail-in voting procedures in
> >>>> response to the pandemic, which is entirely legal if done in accordance with
> >>>> state laws. These changes were made to ensure voter safety and accessibility.
> >>>> Courts generally upheld these changes as legal, with some minor exceptions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 11: 30,000 more ineligible ballots in swing states
> >>>>
> >>>> There is no evidence to support the claim that 30,000 ineligible ballots were
> >>>> cast in swing states. Audits and recounts in key states, including Georgia and
> >>>> Arizona, have consistently shown that the number of ineligible ballots was
> >>>> extremely low and nowhere near enough to affect the outcome of the election.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 12: Pennsylvania allowed new ballots after the election
> >>>>
> >>>> This claim is false. Pennsylvania followed court-approved deadlines for
> >>>> accepting mail-in ballots that were postmarked by Election Day and received
> >>>> within a certain window after the election, which is a standard practice.
> >>>> There is no evidence that ballots were illegally counted after the election.
> >>>>
> >>>> Claim 13: Any one of these is enough to invalidate the election
> >>>>
> >>>> Each of these claims has been investigated and largely debunked. While there
> >>>> were some procedural changes due to the pandemic, none of the claims provide
> >>>> credible evidence of widespread fraud that would invalidate the results of the
> >>>> 2020 election.
> >>>>
> >>>> January 6 vs. Summer 2020 Protests
> >>>>
> >>>> The January 6 attack was not a lawful protest. It was a violent breach of the
> >>>> U.S. Capitol aimed at overturning the results of a democratic election. There
> >>>> were investigations into the conduct of Capitol Police, but there is no
> >>>> evidence of a government cover-up of the deaths of protesters. In contrast,
> >>>> while the summer 2020 protests did lead to property damage and injuries, they
> >>>> were largely protests against police brutality, and widespread condemnation
> >>>> occurred when violence took place.
> >>>>
> >>>> In summary, the 2020 election was one of the most scrutinized elections in
> >>>> U.S. history, with no credible evidence found to support claims of widespread
> >>>> fraud that would have changed the outcome. The claims made here have been
> >>>> widely investigated, with no proof supporting the narrative that the election
> >>>> was stolen.
> >>>
> >>> All that? Did we make you do that? Do you really care? I think you are
> >>> like Rudy. Jus sayen.
> >>
> >> I responded to each point. And your reply... RUN!
> >
> > I'm right here moron You copy/pasted some shit. The point is we made you
> > do it. I want to see you meltdown like Rudy.
>
> The accusations are cut and paste nonsense. I called them out. And you ran.

I'm right here. Yours were wrong.
>
> OK, so you have no counter and no evidence that the election was anything
> other than fair. We can leave it there... but you won't. You lack evidence but
> you have emotion, and your emotion is very important to you.

Do you still feel harmed?