The American “Coup d’etat”

J

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,534
J

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,534
Helioform said:
He did some good things it was not all just politics. I think he really loves his country no matter what.

I agree that the US is dying. Montesquieu said that once the integrity of the republic's election process is compromised, the republic is finished. The US arrived at that point and the end of the 250 year cycle for civilizations. The rest of western nations will follow. Deagel.com's predictions about nuclear war within 5 years and massive population reduction are pretty alarming. They are miltary contractors so they must know something.
Click to expand...
Guess I better move building a bunker up on the timeline huh?
 
J

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,534
Maes17 said:
It’s because we’re intolerant.
We have an identity per se which creates division.

Hopefully relations improve
Click to expand...
I don’t really think that’s it... I think we are scared. Anger is a secondary emotion. That means anger is never the root of the problem, it’s what we use to cover up the root of the problem. If anger is a secondary emotion then HATE which stems from it must be tertiary. There is something underneath all this hate and anger and if we ever want to get past it then we need to figure out what it is. From where I’m sitting it seems to be fear. But maybe someone sees something different idk.
 
Thunderian

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
justjess said:
No one allowed illegal voting. That is what your missing. Nothing about mail in voting was illegal according to Pennsylvania law. So far even trump appointed judges have agreed on that. Yet you don’t.

I don’t have an article on it. I know what I read when I applied for a mail in ballot. I know the process I had to go through which included a double validation process with my social and drivers license needed. I know the disclaimers which were on the page. Mail in voting was expanded in 2015 and used in the 2016 election and the midterms in 2018. It was expanded through the legislature, not the constitution. Why didn’t they challenge those changes? Why only now?
Click to expand...
I’ve said what I’ve said. I’m not interested in restating it.
 
Thunderian

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
Helioform said:
I don't know what the PA lawsuit was all about so I cant say for sure.

Trump would have delayed the deep state for 4 more years. With Biden the empty shell, it will go forward much faster with him doing what his controllers want. But I agree that Trump divided the country, but it was not really his fault it was more because of the marxist infiltration of american society. People whine about transphobia, white supremacy and whatnot on Twitter all day long so this is what you get when you put someone like Trump in power with a society like that.
Click to expand...
Trump’s haters, including Democrats and the media, lied about him and his supporters for four years. They refused to accept his presidency or give him credit for anything he accomplished. Trump supporters were tagged as stupid and racist, over and over and over again. But sure, he divided America.
 
rainerann

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
This is something listed in the Sidney Powell lawsuit that seems to be generally accepted theory regarding dominion software.

“The purpose of this conspiracy was to create and operate a voting system that could change the votes in elections from votes against

persons running the Venezuelan government to votes in their favor in order to maintain control of the government.”

The software itself is propriety so the average person would not be able to look through the code, but outside of there being a lot of code to look through, looking through the code is not a complicated procedure that would be impossible to do in order to prove whether this was true or not.

I don’t even know how you would go about hiding something like this in a program so that it couldn’t be found at all because you would have to make something that would directly manipulate the data. You would have to make a memory location to store this value, and this value would be capable of being found no matter where it was located within the program.

it is practically child’s play and I can’t even take anyone seriously who would suggest this in a court room that could inevitably require turning over the code to review.

reading through the code would be the quickest way to prove this theory true or false. All her crap arguments about witnesses who know secret this or that is nothing more than sensationalizing a bluff.

maybe I’m missing something though. How would you go about hiding something like this in the code?

even if you used a thumb drive with a file on it, you would still be able to find code that would link with this since the actual program would still be hidden in some respect. This is another claim in her lawsuit that someone uses some kind of thumb drive and a screwdriver to add code basically that manipulate entries.

there has to be a door created in the primary source code because this is still going to be manipulated with some kind of user interface at the voting location. I can’t see how most of these claims could not be found bogus by requiring the company to turn over the source code.

a witness is not really enough to prove fraud in a case like this. This whole thing with the computer system seems like a lot of theatrics.

I understand the concept of the voting system being something like loaded dice a lot better than most of these theories. That there is some randomized mechanism leaning more heavily in one direction would make a lot more sense than what is being suggested. If you were going to rig an election, you aren’t going to do this 15 different ways like I see many people suggest. You would pick one way, and this would be the most subtle. However, this is still something that it would seem like you could search through the source code to prove.

Overall, I still think this situations shows that our greatest disadvantage is created by being technologically backward rather than the assumption that the technology has advanced to the point of creating harm.
 
rainerann

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
justjess said:
www.newsweek.com

Georgia GOP Official Named as Plaintiff by Sydney Powell Never Agreed to

Georgia's Cobb County GOP chairman added, "Guess this is what happens when you wait until the last minute."
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
Click to expand...
lol, I was going to say that it looks like the lawsuit describes all of the plaintiffs this Way.

“Plaintiff Vikki Townsend Consiglio, is a registered voter who resides in
Henry County, Georgia. She is a nominee of the Republican Party to be a Presidential Elector on behalf of the State of Georgia.”

90% are all republican nominees to be presidential electors. I don’t know how that process works, but I don’t think this lawsuit is going to help them in their pursuit of being an elector for the state of Georgia.

it is even funnier that she is picking people who are not even agreeing to be plaintiffs in her case. It is like a horror movie that is funny in some parts. That is what this whole situation reminds me of.
 
rainerann

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
So I scanned through the whole Sidney Powell lawsuit. There are at least 10 ways that trump lost votes according to this lawsuit that would result in a minimum loss of around 200,000 votes.

there are several ways the dominion system assisted in this by having WiFi capabilities to manipulate votes. Directly manipulating the device itself. Programming ways to manipulate data so that if trump was selected, it would change to biden. Apparent glitches that cause switches in who won.

just the dominion side with all the bells and whistles listed is at least 100,000 vote potential.

then there are the votes that were turned in and not requested in the amount of 96,000 and I might be getting that backward, but I don’t care to look at the document again. It might be that they were requested and not turned in.

anyways, then there were the several instance where tens of thousands were lost here and tens of thousands were lost there.

“Plaintiff’s expert also finds that voters received tens of thousands of ballots that they never requested”

so altogether, trump should have won by a margin of over 200,000 according to this lawsuit.

a better approach would have been to find a way to request the source code somewhere within this document because trump lost in Georgia by about 12,000 votes.

all she would need to do is prove that Trump should have had an extra 12,001 votes. If you want to go the dominion route, ask for the source code. I cannot see how a more rational complaint directed at gaining privileges to review the source code would be rejected by a court.

however, since she hasn’t done this and has clustered so much crap into a lawsuit filing that reading it starts to make you feel like you have just entered an antique store that only sells figurines of cats from all over the world. Russian cat figurines. German cat figurines. The door makes the sound of a cat meowing when you open it instead of a bell.

I just can’t see it how seriously a court will take this filing because of the way she goes about it. However, even if a court does, Biden doesn’t need Georgia to win. Winning Georgia is like putting a cherry on top of a Sunday. I don’t know why she would even focus on Georgia like it would make much of a difference or why anyone is placing their hope in the election turning around on the outcome of the unexpected results in Georgia.

I think people might have trouble counting. You only need 270 electoral votes to win.
 
Thunderian

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,515
uncoverdc.com

Case Dismissed? Analysis of Decision in Pennsylvania’s Parnell Case

Earlier this evening, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a brief, three-page order dismissing an election lawsuit brought by Sean Parnell and several other qualified Pennsylvania voters challenging the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s recently-enacted state law governing mai
uncoverdc.com uncoverdc.com

From the article:

The Pennsylvania Constitution and Voting Law

The Pennsylvania constitution allows absentee voting under five situations: (1) work; (2) illness; (3) physical disability; (4) the election occurring on a religious holiday; or (5) a person’s election-day duties themselves preventing the person from voting in person. No other justifications are allowed for absentee voting under the Pennsylvania constitution.

Towards the end of 2019, a majority of both houses of the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed the relevant mail-in voting legislation at issue here. As I discussed in my previous two articles, this legislation expanded voting by mail beyond the above-five situations under the Pennsylvania constitution to include any situation. In other words, the law purported to allow voting by mail for any reason whatsoever.

But while the General Assemblypassed the legislation, this was not, in and of itself, sufficient to amend the Pennsylvania constitution and expand voting by mail beyond the above-five circumstances. To amount to a constitutional amendment, the Pennsylvania constitution requires that the law be passed a second time by a majority vote of both houses of the General Assembly in the next legislative assembly. Once that is done, a majority of Pennsylvania voters then have to approve the mail-in voting legislation in a statewide election.

The above process has not taken place. Indeed, the Pennsylvania General Assembly itself appears to have recognized that such an expansion of mail-in voting would have to come about via a constitutional amendment, as the law itself was originally presented as a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution.
 
Maes17

Maes17

Superstar
Joined
Jul 27, 2017
Messages
6,521
justjess said:
I don’t really think that’s it... I think we are scared. Anger is a secondary emotion. That means anger is never the root of the problem, it’s what we use to cover up the root of the problem. If anger is a secondary emotion then HATE which stems from it must be tertiary. There is something underneath all this hate and anger and if we ever want to get past it then we need to figure out what it is. From where I’m sitting it seems to be fear. But maybe someone sees something different idk.
Click to expand...
Well fear and anger correlate so you’re getting the gist. Intolerance is fear of the unkown. The fear of losing say customs/identity etc. Our country is a melting pot, so we have all these cultures who for the most part meet in the middle in the rat race American culture or capitalism. But aside from that groups flock to their own race. Kinda like tribalism. So it’s subconsciously a territorial/fear/tribe like mechanism that drives people to act the way they act.
 
Maes17

Maes17

Superstar
Joined
Jul 27, 2017
Messages
6,521
Thunderian said:
uncoverdc.com

Case Dismissed? Analysis of Decision in Pennsylvania’s Parnell Case

Earlier this evening, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a brief, three-page order dismissing an election lawsuit brought by Sean Parnell and several other qualified Pennsylvania voters challenging the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s recently-enacted state law governing mai
uncoverdc.com uncoverdc.com

From the article:

The Pennsylvania Constitution and Voting Law

The Pennsylvania constitution allows absentee voting under five situations: (1) work; (2) illness; (3) physical disability; (4) the election occurring on a religious holiday; or (5) a person’s election-day duties themselves preventing the person from voting in person. No other justifications are allowed for absentee voting under the Pennsylvania constitution.

Towards the end of 2019, a majority of both houses of the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed the relevant mail-in voting legislation at issue here. As I discussed in my previous two articles, this legislation expanded voting by mail beyond the above-five situations under the Pennsylvania constitution to include any situation. In other words, the law purported to allow voting by mail for any reason whatsoever.

But while the General Assemblypassed the legislation, this was not, in and of itself, sufficient to amend the Pennsylvania constitution and expand voting by mail beyond the above-five circumstances. To amount to a constitutional amendment, the Pennsylvania constitution requires that the law be passed a second time by a majority vote of both houses of the General Assembly in the next legislative assembly. Once that is done, a majority of Pennsylvania voters then have to approve the mail-in voting legislation in a statewide election.

The above process has not taken place. Indeed, the Pennsylvania General Assembly itself appears to have recognized that such an expansion of mail-in voting would have to come about via a constitutional amendment, as the law itself was originally presented as a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Click to expand...
Trumps best case with PA is to have it done in the supreme court. Which again may not prove nothing.

The whole PA resolution thing. Well PA’s legislation leaves that to state electors who so happen to be the voters. If these cases even though Rudy didn’t say it was about fraud. It’s still being shot down as so. I’ve given up on this guy. It’s over and wishful thinking now. If Rudy was smart he would’ve went after Act 77 first thing. He screwed up.
 
J

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,534
Thunderian said:
uncoverdc.com

Case Dismissed? Analysis of Decision in Pennsylvania’s Parnell Case

Earlier this evening, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a brief, three-page order dismissing an election lawsuit brought by Sean Parnell and several other qualified Pennsylvania voters challenging the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s recently-enacted state law governing mai
uncoverdc.com uncoverdc.com

From the article:

The Pennsylvania Constitution and Voting Law

The Pennsylvania constitution allows absentee voting under five situations: (1) work; (2) illness; (3) physical disability; (4) the election occurring on a religious holiday; or (5) a person’s election-day duties themselves preventing the person from voting in person. No other justifications are allowed for absentee voting under the Pennsylvania constitution.

Towards the end of 2019, a majority of both houses of the Pennsylvania General Assembly passed the relevant mail-in voting legislation at issue here. As I discussed in my previous two articles, this legislation expanded voting by mail beyond the above-five situations under the Pennsylvania constitution to include any situation. In other words, the law purported to allow voting by mail for any reason whatsoever.

But while the General Assemblypassed the legislation, this was not, in and of itself, sufficient to amend the Pennsylvania constitution and expand voting by mail beyond the above-five circumstances. To amount to a constitutional amendment, the Pennsylvania constitution requires that the law be passed a second time by a majority vote of both houses of the General Assembly in the next legislative assembly. Once that is done, a majority of Pennsylvania voters then have to approve the mail-in voting legislation in a statewide election.

The above process has not taken place. Indeed, the Pennsylvania General Assembly itself appears to have recognized that such an expansion of mail-in voting would have to come about via a constitutional amendment, as the law itself was originally presented as a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Click to expand...
its semantics. What they actually did was qualify pandemic related social distancing mandates under category five.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top