WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

392

(post is archived)

[–] 4 pts

Just curious how the fck Clarence factually knows '... too few ballots were affected by the new rules for it to make a difference ... ', when as far as i'm aware there has never been any large scale multi-state/county official audit on how many ballots may or may not have been affected ..... Yet all these news article keep repeating 'not enough too make a difference...'.

[–] 2 pts

Widespread voting irregularities can trigger the entire election to be ruled invalid, regardless of specific vote totals. Speculations of "not enough votes to change election results" is a false narrative. The specific vote totals are irrelevant if widespread voting irregularities can be proven, because widespread voting irregularities void the election altogether.

[–] 3 pts

Yes Ikr, its part of the pre-conceived narrative shut down of 'no wide spread election fraud' being proclaimed by everyone everywhere from the very next day after the election (before any one could even know ) then peppered with 'not enough to make a difference' .....

[–] [deleted] 2 pts

It doesn’t help that trumps awful legal team can’t make a case to save their lives.

[–] 2 pts

Yeah, fcking seriously. If that's the best money can buy - dude needs a refund.

Amazed he didn't get lin wood to appear as a surprise witness with an erroneously filed court proceeding to then chastised them all with " It was rhetorical hyperbole ..." (in his best trump accent), i would have actually paid to view that on live stream - he could've come out ahead on shekels ...