Again, counting the print-outs was not what was requested. What the Republicans wanted to see was the data directly on the machines as compared to the data on the print-outs. Counting the same data twice obviously gave the same result twice. It was a huge waste of everyone's time. As I said though, that's inconsequential now since a new president was already inaugurated.
What he actually said was "Kamala put off signing, huh?" in reference to the fact that he was the first to sign the document. You can clearly hear the "huh" at the end, although the man does have a tendency to mumble in an incomprehensible manner.
This
Stop lyingProof? Any evidence of that?
Proof?This
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Stop lying
The time to believe something is when there's evidence, and Joe Biden didn't claim to not know what he was signing.
You don't seem to understand that the machine votes were counted the first time, and the printouts were counted during the audits.
Oh, I fully understand the procedure, I just considered the audit somewhat inadequate. In my opinion all of this stuff should be running on open source code and the anonymised results should be public for anyone with doubts to see. That's neither here nor there though, election procedures are up to individual states, that's their business.
I am likely going to have criticisms of Biden over the next four years. He will definitely make a lot of gaffes over the next four years. This is not one of them. He did not say he didn't know what he was signing. Read the posts above.
Russia did not appoint Trump. However, Russia demonstrably and illegally meddled in the 2016 election to boost Trump and hurt Clinton, and considering the margin in 2016, it very possibly tipped the election.
There is evidence Russian interference did indeed have a widespread effect on the 2016 election. Whether it tipped the election is something we may never know for sure, but it very possibly did.
That wasn't even close to the extent of the Russian meddling.
Xdqwerty
