Posted on Jan 24, 2021
BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Accurate List of 2020 Election Fraud Cases Shows 81 Cases Total, 30 Still...
1.76K
51
12
9
9
0
Not one of the fraud cases connected to the 2020 United States Presidential election were allowed to be presented in any court.
(24 Jan 2021)
(24 Jan 2021)
BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Accurate List of 2020 Election Fraud Cases Shows 81 Cases Total, 30 Still...
Posted from thegatewaypundit.com
Election 2020
Office of the President (POTUS)
Donald Trump
United States
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
3
3
0
As Harry Reid said after admitting lying on the Senate floor, “We won, didn’t we.”
(3)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
PO3 Bob McCord Not to mention the vindictive actions being taken against our citizens that voted for Trump.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
I think if these cases were presented and then argued on their merits, the capitol incident would not have been as likely. There comes a time when people get fed up. That doesn't excuse breaking the law, but it explains a lot of it in this case.
(3)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
I was there. I guarantee that it wouldn't have happened. Most everyone up there was there to let Congress know that they wanted their voice heard. They wanted Congress to hear the evidence that the DOJ refused to hear. And all they were asking for is a FULL AUDIT of the elections in the Contested States because a simple recount is not enough. All that a recount does is count fraudulent ballots over again.
The problems surrounding the elections were so many and of such dubious nature that the only reasonable explanation for them is that those involved were hiding something:
* When you drag ballots out from under a table, where they were placed in advance and hidden from view - after the observers have been sent home - you are not being transparent and forthcoming, and THAT is very suspicious.
* When you allow the election equipment to be connected to the Internet while tabulation is going on, you are in violation of Election procedures which are a matter of law.
* When you violate your own state's constitution and circumvent the lawful process to change voting regulations and procedures, you are in violation of the law.
If you want the election to be seen as valid, you don't hide your activity, you do it all out in the open and you do not deny observers access. You encourage them to observe you in action. It doesn't take a genius to see what was going on. They are Guilty AF!
The problems surrounding the elections were so many and of such dubious nature that the only reasonable explanation for them is that those involved were hiding something:
* When you drag ballots out from under a table, where they were placed in advance and hidden from view - after the observers have been sent home - you are not being transparent and forthcoming, and THAT is very suspicious.
* When you allow the election equipment to be connected to the Internet while tabulation is going on, you are in violation of Election procedures which are a matter of law.
* When you violate your own state's constitution and circumvent the lawful process to change voting regulations and procedures, you are in violation of the law.
If you want the election to be seen as valid, you don't hide your activity, you do it all out in the open and you do not deny observers access. You encourage them to observe you in action. It doesn't take a genius to see what was going on. They are Guilty AF!
(3)
(0)
The Trump campaign chose not to base their court cases on accusations of fraud. Trump and his supporters should start looking right there at Trump and his legal team.
-"The FBI to date has done nothing to review the alleged fraud" (blame Trump; they worked for him)
-"The DOJ denied any alleged material instances of fraud" (blame Trump; they worked for him)
-"The state legislatures certified their results with millions of ballots in question"
-"VP Mike Pence accepted the results despite state legislatures asking him to examine the results"
-See the disconnect? If the state legislatures saw problems, then why did they certify the votes?
-"The FBI to date has done nothing to review the alleged fraud" (blame Trump; they worked for him)
-"The DOJ denied any alleged material instances of fraud" (blame Trump; they worked for him)
-"The state legislatures certified their results with millions of ballots in question"
-"VP Mike Pence accepted the results despite state legislatures asking him to examine the results"
-See the disconnect? If the state legislatures saw problems, then why did they certify the votes?
(2)
(0)
Maj John Bell
The FBI is part of the executive branch, however FBI’s mission is definitely not to “work for the President.” The FBI can and often does do things that are precisely aligned with presidential goals and hopes, may even be potentially embarrassing or contrary to serving President's desires and yet still be acting in furtherance of its mission. The FBI Director is appointed to single 10 year terms to insulate him/her from political pressure, but may be removed by the President. Removal of the Director for allegedly spurious or personal reasons is subject to congressional review and exposes a President to adverse public reaction, and potentially impeachment.
The same is true for the Attorney General as the head of the DOJ except he/she is not nominated to a 10 year term. But the DOJ is mission rather than policy driven. It also has in the past proceeded down paths that are not aligned with Presidential goals. Interference with its mission related priorities can expose President's to adverse public reaction, and potentially impeachment.
The same is true for the Attorney General as the head of the DOJ except he/she is not nominated to a 10 year term. But the DOJ is mission rather than policy driven. It also has in the past proceeded down paths that are not aligned with Presidential goals. Interference with its mission related priorities can expose President's to adverse public reaction, and potentially impeachment.
(2)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
Maj John Bell - They both certainly did seem to work directly for Trump during his administration.
(1)
(0)
Maj John Bell
LTC Kevin B. - If the headlines are to be believed, I doubt that President Trump would share your assessment.
(1)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
Maj John Bell - Of course he wouldn't. He's in the perfect situation to have a completely biased perception of reality.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google