Capitol Armory ad

How I Respond to “ The Fraud is Insignificant and Wouldn’t Change the Outcome”

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • satx78247

    Member, Emeritus
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2014
    8,479
    96
    78208
    What the hell is a "SDUSM" ? And why must a great deal of folks have to use initials for something rather than actually use the word or phrase? Is it laziness or just trying to be "cool"?

    Charlie,

    SORRY. I guess that I should have "spelled out": SPECIAL DEPUTY UNITED STATES MARSHAL, i.e., NOT a US CIVIL SERVICE appointee but instead "a local US Marshal's District hire",

    apologies offered, satx
    DK Firearms
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    It's my belief too many people get their so called facts from tv. I, myself find it very dubious if someone claims "it was plastered all over tv". That triggers my "what agenda are they pushing now" spidey sense.
    Totally agree, tv stopped being a credible source of information long ago. Still, footage of the lawyers talking is probably legit. As is the landscape company's parking lot. Are they TRYING to lose this?

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    Hoji

    Bowling-Pin Commando
    Rating - 100%
    36   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    17,700
    96
    Mustang Ridge
    Back on topic , yes, using the one drop of urine analogy , if so much as one vote can be proven to be tampered with , the entire state is invalidated.
     

    satx78247

    Member, Emeritus
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2014
    8,479
    96
    78208
    Why, is my information factually incorrect? Also, this entire thread is confusing. I have stated repeatedly that the President's legal team should get the facts into court. Seems like that concept is not acceptable? What alternatives are you all proposing (besides secession)?

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

    plinkr,

    Your comments are simply contrary to "AOUSC judicial practice" & therefore are SUSPECT as just being more LEFTIST PROPAGANDA & NONSENSE.

    WHERE are you getting your information??
    (It sounds like you are listening to the "commentators" & "referencing" the comments of network/cable TV "news talking heads".)

    yours, satx
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    plinkr,

    Your comments are simply contrary to "AOUSC judicial practice" & therefore are SUSPECT as just being more LEFTIST PROPAGANDA & NONSENSE.

    WHERE are you getting your information??
    (It sounds like you are listening to the "commentators" & "referencing" the comments of network/cable TV "news talking heads".)

    yours, satx
    Please correct me as to the legal procedures to be followed, or what other avenues are available.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    Back on topic , yes, using the one drop of urine analogy , if so much as one vote can be proven to be tampered with , the entire state is invalidated.
    I understand your position. As I have been reminded here, I'm pretty ignorant of the legal system, so I will just ask. Is the single-vote invalidation the law, or just a principle in which you believe? I agree with the principle, but we live in a society of laws.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    plinkr,

    Do you consider yourself a leftist?

    No, that's not an aspersion.

    It's simply a question.

    Same question asked of me...No, I'm a Conservative.
    I consider myself politically center-right, and an absolute Constitutionalist. In favor of small government, low taxes, strong defense and full accountability from our elected officials. Communism is a cancer on human society. On a personal level, I believe in science and evidence, both of which seem old-fashioned nowadays. Thanks for asking.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    satx78247

    Member, Emeritus
    Emeritus - "Texas Proud"
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 23, 2014
    8,479
    96
    78208
    Please correct me as to the legal procedures to be followed, or what other avenues are available.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

    plinkr,

    FOR STARTERS, LAWYERS in federal practice DO NOT swear to ANYTHING unless they are actual WITNESSES in a case NOR is what they say "out of court" about any legal issue usually the same words that they say in a court session. = There are established rules of the AOUSC as to HOW things in court are presented by all "officers of the court".
    (The majority of your comments are contrary to the ESTABLISHED RULES of the AOUSC.)

    yours, satx
     

    Hoji

    Bowling-Pin Commando
    Rating - 100%
    36   0   0
    May 28, 2008
    17,700
    96
    Mustang Ridge
    I understand your position. As I have been reminded here, I'm pretty ignorant of the legal system, so I will just ask. Is the single-vote invalidation the law, or just a principle in which you believe? I agree with the principle, but we live in a society of laws.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
    Each secretary of state of each state must certify that the vote is true and correct, if there fraud/tampering/ irregularity, it is NOT true and correct.
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    plinkr,

    Sounds good...if it's true, but I sure get a left of center vibe from you.
    Why would I lie? Seems pointless. Perhaps the vibe you are getting is my skepticism to accept at face value some very serious allegations that so far have not been backed up in the legal system. I accept that the system isn't perfect, as several here have pointed out, but if we have some better way to adjudicate this I don't know what it is. The Dems alleged that the Russians influenced the 2016 election, and still believe it 100%. But they never did prove it, did they? Now we have allegations on the other side, and millions of us believe them, but these also haven't yet been proven, have they? If the legal team plans on doing so, now would be a good time.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    Each secretary of state of each state must certify that the vote is true and correct, if there fraud/tampering/ irregularity, it is NOT true and correct.
    Well, I just looked it up, and there are 25 Republican and 20 Democrat Secretaries of State, with 2 Independents. Plus 3 states (AL, HI, UT) where the Lieutenant Governor is in charge of elections. By my count, that makes 27 Republican state election officials that are tasked with certifying elections. We will see.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    Why would I lie? Seems pointless. Perhaps the vibe you are getting is my skepticism to accept at face value some very serious allegations that so far have not been backed up in the legal system. I accept that the system isn't perfect, as several here have pointed out, but if we have some better way to adjudicate this I don't know what it is. The Dems alleged that the Russians influenced the 2016 election, and still believe it 100%. But they never did prove it, did they? Now we have allegations on the other side, and millions of us believe them, but these also haven't yet been proven, have they? If the legal team plans on doing so, now would be a good time.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
    I think you have good intentions but you seem to believe that voting fraud which is so easy to do can be disproven in court. The democrats have been doing this way before Tammany Hall and they are pros at it. The mail in system is absolutely ripe for fraud, especially when the identifying features are removed from the ballot itself. You can recount a forged ballot a thousand times and get the same result. When more people vote than are eligible I think that is fraud.
    In Pennsylvania a judge allowed votes to be counted even though the law in Pennsylvania doesn't allow it when turned in late. So the idea of truth in the courts is out.
    The reality is that many people will believe that the election was stolen from Trump by skillful fraud and it very may well be true. But truth will not come out in the courts, Biden I believe will be the next president and if we lose the senate in Georgia we will be in a sh*tload of trouble. To the mowing guy, everyone is a commie.
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    I think you have good intentions but you seem to believe that voting fraud which is so easy to do can be disproven in court. The democrats have been doing this way before Tammany Hall and they are pros at it. The mail in system is absolutely ripe for fraud, especially when the identifying features are removed from the ballot itself. You can recount a forged ballot a thousand times and get the same result. When more people vote than are eligible I think that is fraud.
    In Pennsylvania a judge allowed votes to be counted even though the law in Pennsylvania doesn't allow it when turned in late. So the idea of truth in the courts is out.
    The reality is that many people will believe that the election was stolen from Trump by skillful fraud and it very may well be true. But truth will not come out in the courts, Biden I believe will be the next president and if we lose the senate in Georgia we will be in a sh*tload of trouble. To the mowing guy, everyone is a commie.
    Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. If the Senate goes, all we have left is SCOTUS.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    plinkr

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Feb 18, 2019
    285
    26
    US
    Not if they pack the courts. Think about it.
    I suspect that SCOTUS will remain at 9 justices. Lower courts, every administration tries to get as many judges appointed as they can, Trump and McConnell were very successful in this.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
     

    rotor

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 1, 2015
    4,239
    96
    Texas
    I suspect that SCOTUS will remain at 9 justices. Lower courts, every administration tries to get as many judges appointed as they can, Trump and McConnell were very successful in this.

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
    I hope you are right.
     
    Top Bottom