Trump personally pressured Justice Department officials to declare that the election was corrupt

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
There is no evidence everyone shares your opinion on subjective terms like "widespread" or mail in ballots are safe.

If mail in ballots are safe and secure so is mail order ammo.

Why am I not surprised that your response was something other than evidence of widespread voter fraud?

Why am I not surprised that you didn't address at all my point about how conservatives are arbitrarily alleging fraud in the 2020 election while ignoring the 2016 election?

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
Why am I not surprised that your response was something other than evidence of widespread voter fraud?

Why am I not surprised that you didn't address at all my point about how conservatives are arbitrarily alleging fraud in the 2020 election while ignoring the 2016 election?

Why am I not surprised you attributing statements I didn't make because I think Voter ID is essential for election integrity and fosters trust in the electoral system.

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
Why am I not surprised you attributing statements I didn't make

You baselessly (and hypocritically) called the 2020 election "corrupt," Jimbo.

Xzi · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
You baselessly (and hypocritically) called the 2020 election "corrupt," Jimbo.

If not for baseless statements, he'd have to stop posting altogether.

I'm a bit surprised Barr didn't go along with the whole thing, but at the same time, he had seen everybody else close to Trump get thrown under the bus already. I guess they both thought they were using the other for personal gain.

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
You baselessly (and hypocritically) called the 2020 election "corrupt," Jimbo.

They were corrupt, that doesn't necessitate wide spread voter fraud.

Poll taxes and literacy tests were entirely legal, those elections were corrupt without fraud. When you change process in the midst of a public health emergency with only partisan approval that is corrupt.

Republicans were very vocal they were not accepting a result that was the outcome of last minute Covid changes to mail in ballots.

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
They were corrupt

Where was the improper conduct in 2020?
Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?
Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?

Xzi said:
If not for baseless statements, he'd have to stop posting altogether.

I'm a bit surprised Barr didn't go along with the whole thing, but at the same time, he had seen everybody else close to Trump get thrown under the bus already. I guess they both thought they were using the other for personal gain.

This news story about Trump explicitly pressuring the Justice Department to overturn the election does solve the mystery of why Barr abruptly resigned.

Xzi · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
They were corrupt, that doesn't necessitate wide spread voter fraud.

Poll taxes and literacy tests were entirely legal, those elections were corrupt without fraud. When you change process in the midst of a public health emergency with only partisan approval that is corrupt.

"When more people vote, it's corrupt because I don't like the outcome."

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
Where was the improper conduct in 2020?

Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?

Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?

This news story about Trump explicitly pressuring the Justice Department to overturn the election does solve the mystery of why Barr abruptly resigned.

If you support a balloting process that only has partisan approval expect nothing more than partisan acceptance of the results.

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
If you support a balloting process that only has partisan approval expect nothing more than partisan acceptance of the results.

I would appreciate direct answers to my questions please. People don't usually have to obfuscate their positions when their positions are defensible. Thank you.

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
I would appreciate direct answers to my questions please. People don't usually have to obfuscate their positions when their positions are defensible. Thank you.

I would appreciate you don't attribute claims & positions to me I did not make.

My position is very clear, we have a partisan divide in election trust, Voter ID and strict balloting auditing are measures to address that.

Xzi · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
If you support a balloting process that only has partisan approval expect nothing more than partisan acceptance of the results.

"Only one of the parties is interested in participating in democracy, so we just shouldn't have democracy any more."

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
I would appreciate you don't attribute claims & positions to me I did not make.

My position is very clear, we have a partisan divide in election trust, Voter ID and strict balloting auditing are measures to address that.

I asked three specific questions, and you don't seem to want to answer them.

Where was the improper conduct in 2020?
Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?
Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
I asked three specific questions, and you don't seem to want to answer them.

Where was the improper conduct in 2020?

Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?

Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?

1. Rushed partisan approvals to allow mail in balloting of varying legality depending on the state.
2. No, the popular vote has no relevancy in our electoral system there is nothing to win.
3. Saying true things about HRC just because her emails were hacked is not corrupt.

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
1. Rushed partisan approvals to allow mail in balloting of varying legality depending on the state.
2. No, the popular vote has no relevancy in our electoral system there is nothing to win.
3. Saying true things about HRC just because her emails were hacked is not corrupt.

You don't seem to like answering questions. I'll try again.

What about mail-in voting was improper or corrupt? Do you have any evidence that mail-in voting is/was improper or corrupt?
Do you acknowledge President Biden won the election (the Electoral College) fairly in 2020?
If you are arguing 2020 was a corrupt or improper election, are you also arguing 2016 (which also had a significant number of mail-in ballots) was corrupt in the same way?

As I said earlier, defensible positions don't usually require obfuscation.

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
You don't seem to like answering questions. I'll try again.

What about mail-in voting was improper or corrupt? Do you have any evidence that mail-in voting is/was improper or corrupt?

Do you acknowledge President Biden won the election (the Electoral College) fairly in 2020?

If you are arguing 2020 was a corrupt or improper election, are you also arguing 2016 (which also had a significant number of mail-in ballots) was corrupt in the same way?

As I said earlier, defensible positions don't usually require obfuscation.

1. Changing the balloting process substantively in swing states as late as October in the midst of an emergency is improper. Doing these things with only partisan support amongst the electorate and little to no time for public review is improper and leads to people doubting election integrity.

2. No, I have no faith last minute balloting changes and Covid measures didn't disenfranchise voters or wasn't rife with fraud.

3. That would require examination of every state that was doing mail in balloting at the time which I am not going to be doing, Generally I don't object to mail in ballots where it has been common place, subject to public review and approval and wasn't implemented in a rush under emergency measures.

Rule changes are done in the off season, not 5 minutes before kick off.

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
1. Changing the balloting process substantively in swing states as late as October in the midst of an emergency is improper. Doing these things with only partisan support amongst the electorate and little to no time for public review is improper and leads to people doubting election integrity.

Is there any evidence that mail-in ballots are susceptible to or resulted in significant election fraud?
If not, how is guaranteeing safe and secure access to voting in the middle of a deadly pandemic "improper" or "corrupt" if it's safe and secure?
How is it improper for a state government to respond to the needs inherent to holding an election during a pandemic?
Does something having "partisan support" automatically mean it's improper or corrupt? Couldn't partisan opposition to something be improper or corrupt?

jimbo13 said:
2. No, I have no faith last minute balloting changes and Covid measures didn't disenfranchise voters or wasn't rife with fraud.

Do you have any evidence anything about the 2020 election was "rife with fraud"?
Do you have any evidence that mail-in ballots and COVID-19 measures "disenfranchised" voters?
How does expanding access to voting deprive someone of the ability to vote?
If we didn't have mail-in ballots and COVID-19 measures in the middle of a pandemic, wouldn't that be what disenfranchised voters?
How early did the rule changes need to be? Many of the changes occurred in 2020, but many months before the election. Many of the COVID-19 mitigations occurred in time for the presidential primary elections.
Many states merely opened access to mail-in voting system that had already been in place for years. If the system already existed for years or decades prior to the 2020 election, does that mean it isn't improper or corrupt?
Many of the COVID-19 mitigations strategies, like mail-in voting, have been demonstrated to be safe and secure. Is there evidence that these methods aren't safe and secure?

jimbo13 said:
3. That would require examination of every state that was doing mail in balloting at the time which I am not going to be doing, Generally I don't object to mail in ballots where it has been common place, subject to public review and approval and wasn't implemented in a rush under emergency measures.

Rule changes are done in the off season, not 5 minutes before kick off.

Many states used mail-in voting systems that already existed for years/decades before the 2020 election, including in the 2016 election. Was the 2016 election corrupt or improper?
There were 14 states that had sudden changes relating to voting that didn't exist in a presidential election before the 2016 election. Some of these rule changes occurred the year of the presidential election. 11/14 of these states went for Trump in the 2016 election, and these 14 states included key states like Arizona, Ohio, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. These rules could broadly be described as making it more difficult to vote. Was the 2016 election corrupt?
In 2016, the mail-in votes made up about 25% of all of the votes. In 2020, the mail-in votes made up about 40-50% of the total votes. Both elections broadly used the same mail-in voting systems. Were they both corrupt, or were neither corrupt?

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
Is there any evidence that mail-in ballots are susceptible to or resulted in significant election fraud?

If not, how is guaranteeing safe and secure access to voting in the middle of a deadly pandemic "improper" or "corrupt" if it's safe and secure?

How is it improper for a state government to respond to the needs inherent to holding an election during a pandemic?

Does something having "partisan support" automatically mean it's improper or corrupt? Couldn't partisan opposition to something be improper or corrupt?

Do you have any evidence anything about the 2020 election was "rife with fraud"?

Do you have any evidence that mail-in ballots and COVID-19 measures "disenfranchised" voters?

How does expanding access to voting deprive someone of the ability to vote?

If we didn't have mail-in ballots and COVID-19 measures in the middle of a pandemic, wouldn't that be what disenfranchised voters?

How early did the rule changes need to be? Many of the changes occurred in 2020, but many months before the election. Many of the COVID-19 mitigations occurred in time for the presidential primary elections.

Many states merely opened access to mail-in voting system that had already been in place for years. If the system already existed for years or decades prior to the 2020 election, does that mean it isn't improper or corrupt?

Many of the COVID-19 mitigations strategies, like mail-in voting, have been demonstrated to be safe and secure. Is there evidence that these methods aren't safe and secure?

Many states used mail-in voting systems that already existed for years/decades before the 2020 election, including in the 2016 election. Was the 2016 election corrupt or improper?

There were 14 states that had sudden changes relating to voting that didn't exist in a presidential election before the 2016 election. Some of these rule changes occurred the year of the presidential election. 11/14 of these states went for Trump in the 2016 election, and these 14 states included key states like Arizona, Ohio, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. These rules could broadly be described as making it more difficult to vote. Was the 2016 election corrupt?

In 2016, the mail-in votes made up about 25% of all of the votes. In 2020, the mail-in votes made up about 40-50% of the total votes. Both elections broadly used the same mail-in voting systems. Were they both corrupt, or were neither corrupt?

I am not writing you an essay, if you make partisan rule changes your only going to have partisan acceptance of the result. That's not a complicated stance. No one is making you agree with it.

Lacius · Jul 31, 2021

jimbo13 said:
I am not writing you an essay, if you make partisan rule changes your only going to have partisan acceptance of the result. That's not a complicated stance. No one is making you agree with it.

That's fine that you don't want to answer each question. In fairness, it was a lot. Feel free to respond to whatever you want to respond to. As my previous post shows though, your answers were insufficient.

You keep throwing around "partisan rule changes," but it goes both ways. Just because a position is "partisan" doesn't mean it's the wrong position or that it's improper. Partisan opposition to mail-in voting, etc. is just as partisan.

In other words, telling me something was partisan doesn't demonstrate anything to be corrupt, improper, fraudulent, etc.

KingVamp · Jul 31, 2021

There's no bipartisan support for all the changes he want and yet he fine with all of them.

jimbo13 · Jul 31, 2021

Lacius said:
That's fine that you don't want to answer each question. In fairness, it was a lot. Feel free to respond to whatever you want to respond to. As my previous post shows though, your answers were insufficient.

You keep throwing around "partisan rule changes," but it goes both ways. Just because a position is "partisan" doesn't mean it's the wrong position or that it's improper. Partisan opposition to mail-in voting, etc. is just as partisan.

In other words, telling me something was partisan doesn't demonstrate anything to be corrupt, improper, fraudulent, etc.

I don't object to in mail in balloting in general, I object to it being tacked on last minute in the midst of of an emergency and relaxing measures surrounding it.

Just because a rule makes sense doesn't make it proper to tack it on at the last minute over the objections of the other participants. Election process can't be partisan and maintain a functional system.

Just because you can, doesn't mean it people are going to accept it. And the right was very vocal, "if this change is made do not expect acceptance or cooperation."

KingVamp said:
There's no bipartisan support for all the changes he want and yet he fine with all of them.

Fair and accurate, when a society can't agree on what constitutes a fair election anymore they probably shouldn't share a government. Make States, States again.

Trump personally pressured Justice Department officials to declare that the election was corrupt

Well-Known Member

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Well-Known Member

Time to fly, 621

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Well-Known Member

Time to fly, 621

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Well-Known Member

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Time to fly, 621

Well-Known Member

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Well-Known Member

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Well-Known Member

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Well-Known Member

Haaah-hahahaha!

Terry Crews #1 Fan

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum