San Anto­nio Elec­tion Fraud­ster Arrest­ed for Wide­spread Vote Har­vest­ing and Fraud

[Dashinka 24,735]

7 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    It shows that:

 

    a) he is a liar.

    b) he knows he is a liar.

    c) he understands the consequences of those actions.

 

   Hopefully he'll get another day in court on the other side of things to explain all that.

Isn't that the definition of a lawyer?

[Orangesapples 1,954]

4 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Isn't that the definition of a lawyer?

Irrelevant. What this shows is that he knows there's no fraud and he says so in court (so that he doesn't perjure himself), but then goes along with Trump's insanity in front of his minions

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

This is a bad thread to be arguing that there's no fraud. Don't think that gaslighting works here. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

Just now, Burnt Reynolds said:

This is a bad thread to be arguing that there's no fraud. Don't think that gaslighting works here. 

That's not what gaslighting means. Also, just because there was fraud in Texas (that there's evidence for) doesn't mean that Trump's claims of fraud were true, he also had no evidence. And lastly, Giuliani was the one arguing there's no fraud, not me. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

1 hour ago, Orangesapples said:

That's not what gaslighting means. Also, just because there was fraud in Texas (that there's evidence for) doesn't mean that Trump's claims of fraud were true, he also had no evidence. And lastly, Giuliani was the one arguing there's no fraud, not me. 

The reality is fraud has already been proven, so to say it in a thread where it was not only demonstrated and the person was caught but additionally admitted to it is indeed gaslighting. Furthermore, the attempt to redirect a thread that has doesn't even mention Trump and Giuliani (because they are not figures involved in this case) to one's preferred narrative of them furthers it. Trump and Giuliani do not encompass the witnesses that came forward about "fraud", "irregularities" and whatever other catch-all terms we use to describe accusations of wrongdoing in the election, nor the dozens of state legislative members who held hearings on these matters or even sent competing electors (in the event of a change to certification), nor members of Congress who objected to the certification. Maybe this bit of reality distorting dishonesty works on others, but lets not try that here, doesn't work on me.

Edited January 15, 2021 by Burnt Reynolds

[Orangesapples 1,954]

5 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

The reality is fraud has already been proven, so to say it in a thread where it was not only demonstrated and the person was caught but additionally admitted to it is indeed gaslighting. Furthermore, the attempt to redirect a thread that has doesn't even mention Trump and Giuliani (because they are not figures involved in this case) to one's preferred narrative of them furthers it. Trump and Giuliani do not encompass the witnesses that came forward about "fraud", "irregularities" and whatever other catch-all terms we use to describe accusations of wrongdoing in the election, nor the dozens of state legislative members who held hearings on these matters or even sent competing electors (in the event of a change to certification), nor members of Congress who objected to the certification. Maybe this bit of dishonesty works on others, but lets not try that here, doesn't work on me.

The only dishonest thing is claiming that fraud in Texas means that the election was fraudulent and that Trump wasn't making things up. They could never prove their case in court and Trump's lawyer himself said it wasn't a fraud case. 

[Dashinka 24,735]

26 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

The only dishonest thing is claiming that fraud in Texas means that the election was fraudulent and that Trump wasn't making things up. They could never prove their case in court and Trump's lawyer himself said it wasn't a fraud case. 

Not sure anyone is saying that, but the fact is there is fraud out there.  Now some states look for it harder than others, and of course you can't find something you are not looking for.  The simple thing here is that when we change our election laws to accommodate the political operatives like the person this thread is about, they will take advantage.  I am not so naïve to think this was the only person who was illegally harvesting votes or bribing folks for a vote for a particular candidate, but of course with as loose as the election surveillance is in most states, it is very easy to get away with it, and much more so this past year.  Was it enough to swing the vote, who knows, but if we keep letting it go, at some point it will be.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

5 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Not sure anyone is saying that, but the fact is there is fraud out there.  Now some states look for it harder than others, and of course you can't find something you are not looking for.  The simple thing here is that when we change our election laws to accommodate the political operatives like the person this thread is about, they will take advantage.  I am not so naïve to think this was the only person who was illegally harvesting votes or bribing folks for a vote for a particular candidate, but of course with as loose as the election surveillance is in most states, it is very easy to get away with it, and much more so this past year.  Was it enough to swing the vote, who knows, but if we keep letting it go, at some point it will be.

The Trump minions were highly motivated to find fraud in the states he lost and yet they couldn't. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

45 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

The only dishonest thing is claiming that fraud in Texas means that the election was fraudulent and that Trump wasn't making things up.

You're literally discussing dishonesty and making things up while dishonestly making up claims I made to debate as if I'm being irrational. Gaslighting it is.

 

8 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

The Trump minions were highly motivated to find fraud in the states he lost and yet they couldn't. 

Not everything is Trump and not everything is fraud. That's a good place to start.

Edited January 15, 2021 by Burnt Reynolds

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

16 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Not sure anyone is saying that, but the fact is there is fraud out there.  Now some states look for it harder than others, and of course you can't find something you are not looking for.  The simple thing here is that when we change our election laws to accommodate the political operatives like the person this thread is about, they will take advantage.  I am not so naïve to think this was the only person who was illegally harvesting votes or bribing folks for a vote for a particular candidate, but of course with as loose as the election surveillance is in most states, it is very easy to get away with it, and much more so this past year.  Was it enough to swing the vote, who knows, but if we keep letting it go, at some point it will be.

Indeed, hundreds of lawsuits were filed prior to the election because of a litany of changes attempted by people in both parties without the authority to do so. If the courts had actually taken on these cases on their merit from the get-go, this would have nullified a litany of claims re:mail-in ballots and votes added past election day. Then you have dozens to hundreds of claims, in affidavits in at least 6 states, of people re-running ballots, obstructing and preventing oversight of verifying/challenging ballots during the election and furthermore obstructing and preventing validation during recounts and audits.

 

The notable deficiency in retorts to this is the complete avoidance of addressing these claims, instead, reinforcement of pathology.. "Trump" "Giuliani" and so on.