Posted on 12/20/2020 9:12:54 AM PST by CheshireTheCat
I think the key part is eligible voters who voted. Not every person who can vote does.
He is deliberately misleading. Just like everyone else that claims the election was rigged. I’ve been chasing down these rabbit holes, from the Frankfurt server to Powell’s Kracken claims, and there is nothing there. But it seems a large number of people on this site are swallowing it hook, line, and sinker.
I voted for Trump both times and don’t want to see a Biden Presidency, but I’m not about to start believing in tin foil hat conspiracy garbage.
You are 100% correct.
It is easy to steal because the Republicans dont fight
The difference is that we would welcome an audit of Trump’s votes if anyone claimed Trump’s votes were fraudulent.
No, the article is full of shit. There were 212 million registered voters, that’s roughly the number of eligible voters (give or take a few million bad registrations due to fraud, moving, death. Even if you assume 20 million bad registrations, that’s 192 million eligible voters, which is much much greater than the 140 million votes. Hoft is a moron, and if he barely understands math, fails at logic.
I thought Bill Binney had been shot. Who am I confusing him with?
There’s more and more poo pooing on FR these days. Tell you what; wouldn’t want a single ass of you in a fox hole next to me. Fellow believers, join me on your knees. This is something that has to be done by God’s Spirit.
So he said to me, “This is the word of the Lord to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the Lord Almighty.
-Zechariah 4:6
Have faith in God people!
Seth Rich?
I remember when Loretta Sanchez stole the election from my congressman, “B1” Bob Dornan. The republicans did nothing.
In the times before he ran he never got more then 2% of the vote yet we are suppose to believe he got more votes this time then anyone in our history?
So you don’t believe there’s been any voter fraud in this election between Trump and Biden? Yes or No
Biden got 16% more votes in 2020 than Obama did in 2008. BTW, the US population grew 8% in that time, so you can count a big chunk right there.
But given 4 years if media attacks, plus ballot harvesting, plus mass ballot mailing, it is totally plausible to get 16% more votes. Hatred is a better motivation than love, and half the country hates Trump.
Gateway Pundit exposes the fraud while presenting the truth. They are truly Patriots!
The republicans did nothing.
***************
Situation normal.
We desperately need a new party.
So what you are saying is that over 13 million democrats registered to vote between March and November. I remember reading a lot of new Republican voters did register and a l of Dems and Independents switched to Republican but as I recall, it wasn’t anything like 13 million.
Certain Republicans are cooperating.
I know that now, after Bejing Mitch has congratulated Biden prematurely, our local BOE is being inundated with requests to be removed from the RepublicanRINO party.
Freepers who were keeping track of electoral votes on the night of Election Day claim that Trump actually won enough electoral votes on that day to be reelected. And I believe them. (I don’t remember seeing running electoral vote totals on Soros News like I have on previous Election Days, correction welcome.)
I don’t think that PDJT will use military unless he absolutely has to. But here is White House petition supporting last resort (my words) Insurrection Act of 1807.
Finally, regarding deep state Supreme Court’s argument of no standing against Texas, please consider that Justice Joseph Story had clarified the following about the Constitution's Clause 3.2.1.
Since the original colonies had a history of disputes that sometimes threatened "serious public mischiefs," Constitutional Convention delegates made the state v. state clause of 3.2.1 to mandate (my word) that the Court at least listen to disputes.
§ 1674. "Under the confederation, authority was given to the national government, to hear and determine, (in the manner pointed out in the article,) in the last resort, on appeal, all disputes and differences between two or more states concerning boundary, jurisdiction, or any other cause whatsoever [!!! emphases added]. Before the adoption of this instrument, as well as afterwards, very irritating and vexatious controveries existed between several of the states, in respect to soil, jurisdiction, and boundary; and threatened the most serious public mischiefs. Some of these controversies were heard and determined by the court of commissioners, appointed by congress. But, notwithstanding these adjudications, the conflict was maintained in some cases, until after the establishment of the present constitution." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 3, Section 2, Clause 1, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833, The University of Chicago Press§ 1675. "Before the revolution, controversies between the colonies, concerning the extent of their rights of soil, territory, jurisdiction, and boundary, under their respective charters, were heard and determined before the king in council, who exercised original jurisdiction therein, upon the principles of feudal sovereignty. This jurisdiction was often practically asserted, as in the case of the dispute between Massachusetts and New Hampshire, decided by the privy council, in 1679; and in the case of the dispute between New Hampshire and New York, in 1764. Lord Hardwicke recognised this appellate jurisdiction in the most deliberate manner, in the great case of Penn v. Lord Baltimore. The same necessity, which gave rise to it in our colonial state, must continue to operate through all future time. Some tribunal, exercising such authority, is essential to prevent an appeal to the sword, and a dissolution of the government [!!! emphasis added]. That it ought to be established under the national, rather than under the state, government; or, to speak more properly, that it can be safely established under the former only, would seem to be a position self-evident, and requiring no reasoning to support it. It may justly be presumed, that under the national government in all controversies of this sort, the decision will be impartially made according to the principles of justice; and all the usual and most effectual precautions are taken to secure this impartiality, by confiding it to the highest judicial tribunal." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 3, Section 2, Clause 1, Commentaries on the Constitution 3,1833, The University of Chicago Press.
The misguided, deep state Supreme Court cannot wash its hands of probable (imo) Democratic vote-stealing for a federal election.
Corrections, insights welcome.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.