Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Department of Justice, the FBI, the local and state election officials, and the courts did not determine that there was no widespread fraud. The determined that they didn't have enough evidence to determine that there was fraud. THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Nobody has shown that the number of ballots counted equaled the number of votes cast. With mail in votes, you can't even prove that a vote was cast unless the ballot survived to be recounted.
Republican officials were allowed to watch from outside the building through a window, and then from 24 feet away. There was no way to tell if fraud was going on at those distances.
The simple truth is that YOU WANT the election to be ruled fair because you want Biden.
I wanted Trump only because I did not want a Democrat doing things to us that destroy the economy.
When you come to a conclusion without evidence for that conclusion, you do not have an objective conclusion, you have a religious belief. This is exactly what the Trumpers are doing: They have reached a conclusion and are trying to find evidence for it. When they cannot find evidence for it, they do what you just did above: They claim that the inability to find evidence is not indicative of an absence of that evidence. Of course, if there was indeed widespread fraud, such evidence would be easy to find. That it is not but they continue to claim it exists, proves that their belief in fraud is just that: A belief. It is a religion.
Let me fix this for you:
Let me fix this for you:
Originally Posted by Troubleshooter And he did what I wanted done:
Protecting our religious rights = If I don't believe in it, you can't do it
Protecting us from criminals = Don't touch my gunzzzz - oh, and don't let any of those brown people in
Protecting our gun rights = Don't touch my gunzzzz (sensing a theme here?)
Protecting our free speech = I can say any damn thing I please even if it leads to insurrection
and all of the things the evil liberals want to abolish.
You're welcome
Look who is pushing her liberal religion on me.
- She wants religion removed because SHE does not like it. She does not care that I have the right to obey my own religion. Never mind that the first amendment does not allow people to force others to believe or obey their religions. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO BELIEVE WHAT YOU WANT AND I HAVE THE RIGHT TO BELIEVE WHAT I WANT.
- She wants gun rights removed because she is afraid of guns. But there is no reason to be afraid of an honest person with a gun. The way she wants it, only criminals have guns (because they don't obey gun control laws). That's when she should be afraid - everyone with a gun is a crook.
- She thinks I want racism??? I hate racism.
- She thinks that the insurrection that was planned and equipped before the president made the speech was incited by the speech? She really wants to silence anyone whose beliefs are different than hers. Only the liberals heard any inciting remarks in that speech and they had to twist word meanings to hear it.
In other words, she is saying "I am right and you are wrong, so you must shut up!"
I have the right to obey my religion by not paying taxes that government uses to disobey my religion.
I have the right to not obey your religion.
I have the right to believe in any political opinion and to express that opinion.
YOU do not have the right to hate anyone because of what he believes.
Hate to break it to you - the burden of proof falls on the one who brings the suit. We don't have to prove anything. And yes - if you cannot prove your case in court it most likely DOES mean it didn't happen, or at least that it doesn't matter because the chance it DID happen is so miniscule that not only was the judgment not in your favor, the courts declined to even find enough proof to HEAR it. This is how our great judicial system functions.
Wrong. Many people never bring suit because the criminals destroyed the evidence so they can't prove their case.
Again, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. NOBODY can prove that something does not exist or that something did not happen. This includes the courts. They have no proof at all that it did not happen. So if there is no proof either way, they have just as much proof that it happened as they have that it did not happen.
You just want your way to be the truth.
They brought the suits to force discovery of hidden evidence because they were not allowed to investigate without it.
- She wants religion removed because SHE does not like it. She does not care that I have the right to obey my own religion. Never mind that the first amendment does not allow people to force others to believe or obey their religions. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO BELIEVE WHAT YOU WANT AND I HAVE THE RIGHT TO BELIEVE WHAT I WANT.
- She wants gun rights removed because she is afraid of guns. But there is no reason to be afraid of an honest person with a gun. The way she wants it, only criminals have guns (because they don't obey gun control laws). That's when she should be afraid - everyone with a gun is a crook.
- She thinks I want racism??? I hate racism.
- She thinks that the insurrection that was planned and equipped before the president made the speech was incited by the speech? She really wants to silence anyone whose beliefs are different than hers. Only the liberals heard any inciting remarks in that speech and they had to twist word meanings to hear it.
In other words, she is saying "I am right and you are wrong, so you must shut up!"
I have the right to obey my religion by not paying taxes that government uses to disobey my religion.
I have the right to not obey your religion.
I have the right to believe in any political opinion and to express that opinion.
YOU do not have the right to hate anyone because of what he believes.
Let's talk specifics here:
How is the left trying to force you not to believe or obey your religion?
If you hate racism, then exactly what criminals did the great Trump protect you from?
FYI: I'm not in the least afraid of guns, I'm afraid of nut cases with guns and the more guns are out there, the higher chance they will be in the hands of a nut case. Also, the insurrection was planned on Parler, which all you Trumpers threw a tantrum over them being 'silenced' = get your own servers.
The Department of Justice, the FBI, the local and state election officials, and the courts did not determine that there was no widespread fraud. The determined that they didn't have enough evidence to determine that there was fraud. THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Nobody has shown that the number of ballots counted equaled the number of votes cast. With mail in votes, you can't even prove that a vote was cast unless the ballot survived to be recounted.
Republican officials were allowed to watch from outside the building through a window, and then from 24 feet away. There was no way to tell if fraud was going on at those distances.
The simple truth is that YOU WANT the election to be ruled fair because you want Biden.
I wanted Trump only because I did not want a Democrat doing things to us that destroy the economy.
The simple truth is that Trump lost the election.
Your assertion that there is no evidence because the evidence was destroyed ignores the recounts and audits that were conducted. Your beliefs are contradicted by the evidence. The Department of Justice, the FBI, and even the local election officials looked for fraud. They studied the recordings. They listened to the people who filed complaints. They looked.
And as for the number of votes cast, are you under the impression that local and state officials don't track the number of votes cast? Because, of course, they do. They keep track of the number of voters (that's how they determine turnout percentages), and when they count the ballots, if the numbers are off, election officials would know.
Republican officials were allowed to watch from the same distance that Democrat officials were allowed to watch. Which in most cases was from about ten feet.
Why you favored one candidate over another is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there is no evidence to support your beliefs. Which means that your beliefs are based on a leap of faith, not on any credible claims.
When you come to a conclusion without evidence for that conclusion, you do not have an objective conclusion, you have a religious belief.
But what if the evidence exists, but is held under lock and key by the other side? How do you get the evidence to prove your case if the other side has it locked up or has destroyed it?
Your namecalling is indirect evidence of bias. You WANT there to have been no cheating.
They have indirect evidence of the conclusion (from the shenanigans the Democrats were seen doing) and are trying to get legal discovery to get direct evidence for it.
Actually the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence but it is also not evidence of presence.
Of course, if there was indeed widespread fraud, such evidence would be easy to find unless the perpetrators were careful to not leave any evidence behind.
The problem is that there are too many inconsistencies. If those were not there, I would not be wanting investigations. The problem is that, if there were no fraud, these inconsistencies would not have happened. It doesn't pass the smell test:
- Keeping the ballot counting observers outside the building or 24 feet away (where they can't really see what is being done to the ballots)
- 5 post offices broken into in Tennessee on election day
- A suspicious power failure at precincts in Indiana
- A video of people carrying large cases into the building housing the ballots after hours.
- A box of ballots found in the trash
- A box of ballots found in a river
- Allowing mail-in ballots (which have no way to detect fraud of destruction)
- Too many people who think it would be a public service to cheat the election to get rid of Trump
- Too many people just irrationally hate Trump
- The fact that Democrats are trying to quash any investigations - what are they hiding?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
