I want you to honestly think about this and then tell me your thoughts.
I watched every single deposition and did a deep dig into everything that was going on. They never actually presented any real evidence of major voting fraud.
They would say that voting machines were manipulated but they would not say how.
They would say that votes were switched but they could not say whose votes or name any names.
They would say underage people voted but could not name who these people were.
On and On It went like this, they never provided any evidence outside of accusation.
What am I missing here?
My best analogy is this:
Walmart gets looted during a riot. However, the looters are in California and smart (LOL) and not a single one takes more than the $950 limit.
Anyone viewing the store can tell it was completely looted of every single item, and suffered a loss.
The insurance company won't "pay out" because in order to recoup the losses, Walmart has to point blame at someone with evidence.
Since no single looter took enough to be charged by the court system, in the eyes of the legal system, there is no looter.
All of the voter fraud evidence is different than election fraud, and both types are easily overlooked by the system for the exact same reasons. Even though, collectively, there is obvious evidence of fraud, there is no person that did it, and (((nobody))) is willing to look deep enough to challenge the system.
(post is archived)