Has Donald J. Trump overturned the Election result today?

I and several others hve corrected your dim unerstanding of the US Constitution.

Im certainly not worried about your squealing about what you know when its obvious to many of us that you are one dim bulb

Now go back to the basement and leave the discussion to folks who know of what they speak.

What the hell are you talking about, Brandon? I didn't say anything about a tape recorder.

The court rejected her testimony because it is unsubstantiated. This isn't that complicated.

I can send you my copies of the Mueller Report........but I bet you wouldn't read them.

the Mueller report clearly stated that there were other criminal charges that would be considered after hes O. O. O.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

maxdancona wrote:

The Mueller investigation was an attempt to understand the Ruusian influence on our election.

This Trump tantrum is an attempt to stay in power.

They are not the same at all. I will not complain about any congressional investigation.

Trump was repeatedly said for years, and is even still said, to have actively cooperated with the Russians in election cheating. The Mueller report said that although the Trump campaign received numerous offers, they didn't accept any of them.[/size]

Any candidate in any election has the right to ask for a recount or an audit, if either the margin of victory is small or he can show evidence suggesting fraud. It isn't remotely unethical. Gore did it and others have done it. Cheating, however, is unethical.

That is NOT what the Mueller Report said.

"Mueller found no evidence members of the Trump campaign -- or anyone associated with it -- colluded with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, despite numerous offers from Kremlin-linked sources."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/more-than-half-of-americans-believe-mueller-probe-was-fair-satisfied-with-results-poll

Even that questionable source does not say that:

"The Mueller report said that although the Trump campaign received numerous offers, they didn't accept any of them."

Obviously you have difficulty reading with comprehension, Brandon.

Work on that.

I will note in passing that like most liberals, you are constitutionally incapable of engaging in an argument for long with making personal comments about the person you are arguing with.

As can be seen in many examples on A2K, this tendency to go ad hominem can be found in political arguments across the ideological spectrum and is not an exclusively liberal phenomenon.

The tactic has a certain appeal and offers a measure of satisfaction, to be sure,

but it's not the same as refuting an argument with facts, figures, and logic.

On the other hand, no one ever convinces anyone of anything in these threads anyway, no matter how skillfully an argument is laid out, no matter how reasonable the presentation, no matter how scintillating the rhetoric,

so one might as well simply cut to the chase and label one's opponent an asshole right away -- before he calls you one first.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

maxdancona wrote:

The Mueller investigation was an attempt to understand the Ruusian influence on our election.

This Trump tantrum is an attempt to stay in power.

They are not the same at all. I will not complain about any congressional investigation.

Trump was repeatedly said for years, and is even still said, to have actively cooperated with the Russians in election cheating. The Mueller report said that although the Trump campaign received numerous offers, they didn't accept any of them.[/size]

Any candidate in any election has the right to ask for a recount or an audit, if either the margin of victory is small or he can show evidence suggesting fraud. It isn't remotely unethical. Gore did it and others have done it. Cheating, however, is unethical.

That is NOT what the Mueller Report said.

"Mueller found no evidence members of the Trump campaign -- or anyone associated with it -- colluded with Russia during the 2016 presidential election, despite numerous offers from Kremlin-linked sources."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/more-than-half-of-americans-believe-mueller-probe-was-fair-satisfied-with-results-poll

Even that questionable source does not say that:

"The Mueller report said that although the Trump campaign received numerous offers, they didn't accept any of them."

Obviously you have difficulty reading with comprehension, Brandon.

Work on that.

It says that although the Trump campaign received numerous offers, there is no evidence they accepted any of them. My original point was that despite no evidence of such collusion, liberals repeatedly said and still say that Trump colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election.

I will note in passing that like most liberals, you are constitutionally incapable of engaging in an argument for long with making personal comments about the person you are arguing with.

No. Donald J Trump has not overturned the election result today.

Although he had no access to the machines, Dr. Kershavarz has looked at available data about the election and the vote results. Based on that information, he concluded

1. The counts in the disputed states (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia) show electronic manipulation.

2. The simultaneous decision in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia to pretend to halt counting votes was unprecedented and demonstrated a coordinated effort to collude toward desired results.

3. One to two percent of votes were forged in Biden's favor.

4. Optical scanners were set to accept unverified, un-validated ballots.

5. The scanners failed to keep records for audits, an outcome that must have been deliberately programmed.

6. The stolen cryptographic key, which applied to all voting systems, was used to alter vote counts.

7. The favorable votes pouring in after hours for Biden could not be accounted for by a Democrat preference for mailed in ballots. They demonstrated manipulation. For example, in Pennsylvania, it was physically impossible to feed 400,000 ballots into the machines within 2–3 hours.

8. Dominion used Chinese parts, and there's reason to believe that China, Venezuela, Cuba interfered in the election.

9. There was a Hammer and Scorecard cyber-attack that altered votes in the battleground states, and then forwarded the results to Scytl servers in Frankfurt, Germany, to avoid detection.

10. The systems failed to produce any auditable results.

Based on the above findings, Dr. Keshavarz-Nia concluded with "high confidence that the election 2020 data were altered in all battleground states resulting in a [sic] hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump to be transferred [sic] to Vice President Biden."

This is going to be tough evidence for Democrats to counter. Back when the naïve Democrats thought Trump would be the one to commit fraud, they held congressional hearings and wrote articles about the voting machines' vulnerability. And with the New York Times touting Dr. Keshavarz-Nia's brilliance and his ability to sniff out fraud, they'll struggle to that he's not a reliable expert. Things are getting fun.

They're getting close!

Quote:

Although he had no access to the machines, Dr. Kershavarz has looked at available data about the election and the vote results. Based on that information, he concluded

1. The counts in the disputed states (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia) show electronic manipulation.

2. The simultaneous decision in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia to pretend to halt counting votes was unprecedented and demonstrated a coordinated effort to collude toward desired results.

3. One to two percent of votes were forged in Biden's favor.

4. Optical scanners were set to accept unverified, un-validated ballots.

5. The scanners failed to keep records for audits, an outcome that must have been deliberately programmed.

6. The stolen cryptographic key, which applied to all voting systems, was used to alter vote counts.

7. The favorable votes pouring in after hours for Biden could not be accounted for by a Democrat preference for mailed in ballots. They demonstrated manipulation. For example, in Pennsylvania, it was physically impossible to feed 400,000 ballots into the machines within 2–3 hours.

8. Dominion used Chinese parts, and there's reason to believe that China, Venezuela, Cuba interfered in the election.

9. There was a Hammer and Scorecard cyber-attack that altered votes in the battleground states, and then forwarded the results to Scytl servers in Frankfurt, Germany, to avoid detection.

10. The systems failed to produce any auditable results.

Based on the above findings, Dr. Keshavarz-Nia concluded with "high confidence that the election 2020 data were altered in all battleground states resulting in a [sic] hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump to be transferred [sic] to Vice President Biden."

This is going to be tough evidence for Democrats to counter. Back when the naïve Democrats thought Trump would be the one to commit fraud, they held congressional hearings and wrote articles about the voting machines' vulnerability. And with the New York Times touting Dr. Keshavarz-Nia's brilliance and his ability to sniff out fraud, they'll struggle to that he's not a reliable expert. Things are getting fun.

Inexplicably, it was all thrown out of court....

The deadline for selecting electors is midnight today.

Maybe the Supreme Court will emphatically do nothing.