Big D vs Twitter

[dantes]

So it’s a fishing expedition to try to find something... anything else?

As I understand it - imbalances like this are common and usually due to human error like not being properly recorded and are extremely unlikely to be an indicator of any sort of fraud.

A mail in voting envelope comes in, without a voting slip inside - there you go, that’s an imbalance - 1 vote received & 0 vote counted.

The audit is ultimately to explain these 34 vote discrepancies.

Yes, but you don't know the explanation beforehand, so that's why you need to check every possible cause by doing a full audit. It's a fishing expedition, but she has used the clever excuse of this had happened too many times and it's time to sort it out once and for all. You can't reasonably say no to that, yet you seem not to have a care in the world that they have said no.

 

[dantes]

It's more like arguing that the grass was cut improperly like an embarassing cunt because you lost comfortably.

Actually you assume he lost comfortably for inconclusive reasons. You don't know that definitively and you won't know it unless the raw count data is subpoenaed and analysed.

 

[Farkmaster]

Actually you assume he lost comfortably for inconclusive reasons. You don't know that definitively and you won't know it unless the raw count data is subpoenaed and analysed.

Nope, I know it because it already happened and I have this weird thing called pattern recognition, so I can understand that trump is being a whiny impotent cunt and throwing his toys out of the pram.

 

[StevieM]

Actually you assume he lost comfortably for inconclusive reasons. You don't know that definitively and you won't know it unless the raw count data is subpoenaed and analysed.

Well at least your honest.

Basically- I don’t like it that Trump lost and I don’t know why (simple reason - because more people dislike him & his policies than like). Therefore let’s chuck enough shit out there to make it look like something odd has happened and keep digging until we can find anything that might in anyway support Trump.

If we find nothing - all good - we can just keep pretending there still might be a fraud some where - we just haven’t been allowed to find it by the deep state/cabal/Soros/lizards/Walt Disney/Easter Bunny/Tooth Fairy/... etc, etc

And woe betide anyone that obstructs justice - because Trump definitely doesn’t do that.... no sireeeee - full access to all his records, open book to prove he hasn’t ever lied or committed fraud (court case pending - probably more than one).

 

[Frogfish]

Or try to explain to you for the third time that the discrepancy is her excuse to request the audit. The purpose of the audit is not to fix the discrepancy. It's actually to catch detroit out if/because they cheated.

They could refuse saying it's minor. She put her foot down and said it's unfair to the poor voters and volunteers, it always happens every election, and reeled of her sob story. They agreed. Then went back on their word and say they're not doing the audit after all.

You're fixated on the 34 vote total for some reason. It's irrelevant. The issue is auditing all the votes.

Actually the 34 votes is entirely relevant because it falls easily within the accepted variance for hand counts. Therefore it's totally illogical to call for an audit. She's just posturing.

 

[Farkmaster]

The stages of grief for cultists.

 

[dantes]

Actually the 34 votes is entirely relevant because it falls easily within the accepted variance for hand counts. Therefore it's totally illogical to call for an audit. She's just posturing.

Imagine saying that to the STA when they call for an audit of your financial statements over a $34 discrepancy. It'd probably cost you more than social credits.

 

[dantes]

Nope, I know it because it already happened and I have this weird thing called pattern recognition, so I can understand that trump is being a whiny impotent cunt and throwing his toys out of the pram.

So you're no longer assuming he lost, but rather you're assuming that you know he lost.

 

[dantes]

Dantes: posts video of official county canvasser explaining that she called for audit, county agreed, then went back on their word
StevieM: misunderstands audit and says it will correct 34 / 400 votes, he'll still lose
Dantes: clears up misconception about audit
StevieM: hmmm should I now wonder why the rest of the board lied about doing an audit to the canvasser to get her vote, then refused to follow through? Nah fuck it, let me just blame dantes....

Well at least your honest.

Basically- I don’t like it that Trump lost and I don’t know why (simple reason - because more people dislike him & his policies than like). Therefore let’s chuck enough shit out there to make it look like something odd has happened and keep digging until we can find anything that might in anyway support Trump.

If we find nothing - all good - we can just keep pretending there still might be a fraud some where - we just haven’t been allowed to find it by the deep state/cabal/Soros/lizards/Walt Disney/Easter Bunny/Tooth Fairy/... etc, etc

And woe betide anyone that obstructs justice - because Trump definitely doesn’t do that.... no sireeeee - full access to all his records, open book to prove he hasn’t ever lied or committed fraud (court case pending - probably more than one).

 

[Grjt2]

Tragic.

If the positions were reversed the guffawing and snowflake jibes would be deafening

 

[dantes]

You must have missed my snowflake jibe from the other day.

Probably related to these fucking morons who voted, then turned into pussies, and are now saying woe is us we made a mistake long after the fact. For once I hope the threats they received materialise.

 

[The Nomad]

You must have missed my snowflake jibe from the other day.

Time had passed for an audit in any case. It's all just smoke and mirrors.

Trump is done. Whichever way you look at it. Just depends how much damage he does holding on to the door for the next two months, and how long Americans will deal with the fall out afterwards. Could be years.

 

[dantes]

The party responsible for that time passing is still important. If Trump sues for damages when the evidence of fraud is finally revealed, the democrats can't say oh well why didn't you tell us earlier and we'd have happily done the audit, it's too late now, you lost your remedy due to your own delay. That defence is off the table with all the cases he has filed up front precisely when there was time for an audit.

The only remedy in the future for his loss will be financial. Tremendous financial. Bigly financial.

 

[Grjt2]

What loss?

<1% variation on his already losing results? What a complete load of bollocks.

 

[dantes]

What loss?

<1% variation on his already losing results? What a complete load of bollocks.

He can plead damages he has incurred by no longer being president. For example the damage to his reputation will be a lot, that gets converted into dollars. His salary will go up once he goes back to his day job, but the four years after he would have enjoyed a far higher earning potential after serving two terms than just one, or that's what he will plead. The members of his administration, including his family, can all plead the same. The court will have to turn the loss of the presidency into a number, and with Trump's net worth that number will be pretty big.

 

[dantes]

Just look at the increase in Obama's net worth. That'd be exhibit 1.

 

[Grjt2]

He can plead damages he has incurred by no longer being president. For example the damage to his reputation will be a lot, that gets converted into dollars. His salary will go up once he goes back to his day job, but the four years after he would have enjoyed a far higher earning potential after serving two terms than just one, or that's what he will plead. The members of his administration, including his family, can all plead the same. The court will have to turn the loss of the presidency into a number, and with Trump's net worth that number will be pretty big.

No he can’t. He simply can’t. He cannot prove that there is sufficient variability in the results that would have made him president. He might be able to prove some degree of negative variation. But there is no “loss”. You know this already.

 

[dantes]

No he can’t. He simply can’t. He cannot prove that there is sufficient variability in the results that would have made him president. He might be able to prove some degree of negative variation. But there is no “loss”. You know this already.

He could prove it if the count data shows the number of votes that exhibit statistical anomalies are sufficient to flip that state. The standard of proof is just a balance of probabilities in a damages claim, it's not a criminal fraud trial. So that's one way. I think this could be the case because of the data taken off news sources plotted against time on election night, seemed highly irregular to me. Then you call in witnesses, as them things like for the entire evening you were counting 10,000 votes per hour, how come in the middle of the night you suddenly upped that to 100,000 in a single hour? Those types of things are one way he can win.

Alternatively, the anomalies are too small too flip the state. He can still make the procedural argument that the anomalies if they had turned up in an audit at the time, then the state wouldn't have certified the result, and I'd have one. This is another way to do it without sufficient variability.

If there are absolutely no anomalies, he can make the same arguments they're making now based solely on the rules and constitution not being followed, then on the same basis say there wouldn't have been certification and he'd have one. He's only failed to get injunctions to stop the count/certification so far based on this argument. That has no bearing on what will happen if he makes the same argument in a full trial.

 

[Woland]

It's a shame you don't know how fucking ridiculous this all sounds, but then you wouldn't be typing it

 

[dantes]

It's a shame you don't know how fucking ridiculous this all sounds, but then you wouldn't be typing it

I don't mean to be rude, but compared to me you know absolutely nothing about the law. Your claim that it's ridiculous is essentially based upon everyone in the news says it's ridiculous and Trump is ridiculous. A real solid claim.

 

[Woland]

No it isn't. It's based on you being ridiculous and not having a fucking clue. You were still going on about the sudden spike in Biden votes on the night of the election yesterday when that was dealt with that hour. I just couldn't be arsed to pull you up on it because you're a fucking nutjob and you'll post another pointless eight paragraphs about some other bullshit that isn't relevant either.

 

[dantes]

No it isn't. It's based on you being ridiculous and not having a fucking clue. You were still going on about the sudden spike in Biden votes on the night of the election yesterday when that was dealt with that hour. I just couldn't be arsed to pull you up on it because you're a fucking nutjob and you'll post another pointless eight paragraphs about some other bullshit that isn't relevant either.

Your memory is also not as good as mine. What was dealt with that hour was all 100% of the votes being for Biden, which was a human error. What was not dealt with is the anomalous jumps in Biden's vote totals when you plot the running totals over time. You weren't paying enough attention to know the difference.

 

[Woland]

Good luck with it all dude. Your speculations are bizarre, without merit, and a waste of time.

 

[Rosco]

Why did Dominion pull out giving testimony in Pennsylvania ?

What have they got to hide ?

 

[The Nomad]

Why did Dominion pull out giving testimony in Pennsylvania ?

What have they got to hide ?

Because this....

They weren't used in Philly...


"We had agreed to discuss Pennsylvania’s election process and the fact that election officials in the fourteen customer counties that we support had enjoyed a smooth and successful election. However, as we await the opportunity to debunk the baseless conspiracy theories being offered about Dominion and its voting systems in a court of law based on yesterday’s press conference claims that litigation is coming, we had to ask for a postponement of the discussion. Notably, our company doesn’t even support Philadelphia, or some of the other jurisdictions being targeted by attorneys in their remarks."

 

[rubans]

Just look at the increase in Obama's net worth. That'd be exhibit 1.

How they are both even remotely comparable?
Massive amount of social credits between both.
If Trump cared about a credible case then why get Giuliani to lead the team?
Biden didn’t win this election, Trump lost it alone. Typical of any far right leader, self destruction and incapable of lasting change.

 

[rubans]

Because this....

They weren't used in Philly...


"We had agreed to discuss Pennsylvania’s election process and the fact that election officials in the fourteen customer counties that we support had enjoyed a smooth and successful election. However, as we await the opportunity to debunk the baseless conspiracy theories being offered about Dominion and its voting systems in a court of law based on yesterday’s press conference claims that litigation is coming, we had to ask for a postponement of the discussion. Notably, our company doesn’t even support Philadelphia, or some of the other jurisdictions being targeted by attorneys in their remarks."

Can you not please post any credible reasons for open ended questions, spoil sport.

 

[dantes]

Because this....

They weren't used in Philly...


"We had agreed to discuss Pennsylvania’s election process and the fact that election officials in the fourteen customer counties that we support had enjoyed a smooth and successful election. However, as we await the opportunity to debunk the baseless conspiracy theories being offered about Dominion and its voting systems in a court of law based on yesterday’s press conference claims that litigation is coming, we had to ask for a postponement of the discussion. Notably, our company doesn’t even support Philadelphia, or some of the other jurisdictions being targeted by attorneys in their remarks."

Not seeing how one follows from the other there. What they mean is we're going to need to keep our options open about what we say to defend the litigation, so we can't go on the record now with one set of lies that we would probably need to substitute for a different set of lies in court.

 

[Mamma Mia]

The worst, and saddest, thing Trump has done is turn the smartest person in the world into a blubbering fucking moron.

 

[dantes]

The worst, and saddest, thing Trump has done is turn the smartest person in the world into a blubbering fucking moron.

You spelt universe wrong. Also perhaps you're listening to the characterisation of fraud believers by the news, and projecting that ready-made template onto me.