Newsmax and Fox - coughing up dough

@no1marauder said
Then the Carter report proposed a series of measures meant to improve ballot security and prevent fraud, virtually all of which were adopted by almost all the States. It never called for the abolition of absentee ballot and President Carter specifically endorsed their use.https://www.cartercenter.org/news/pr/2020/jimmy-carter-on-absentee-ballots.html

That changes nothing. Buying votes is election fraud and mail in voting makes it super easy. Common sense. In person voting is the way to go.

The Carter/Baker report was accurate. Still is. Carter's endorsement did not change that fact. He was a corrupt minion of the Rockefellers.

@no1marauder said
I don't need a "forsenic analysis" when there was an actual hand count of the paper ballots.

You don't need voting machines if you are going to count the ballots by hand.
What good are they? You just made the case for abolishing voting machines. Now you know why the UK does not waste money on them. Why are we?

@wildgrass said
Venezuela was written in the"forensic analysis"

Where was the evidence supporting this? Because it didn't seem to say.

What was written about it?
Explain the relevance. Why did you bring it up? Does it have anything to do with Smartmatic? Because that is not Dominion.

Your position seems to be the mere mention of Venezuela in the report makes the report invalid. Either it means something or it doesn't. Since you are evading explaining the relevance I am guessing it means nothing.

Voting machines are a waste of money. Ballots should be counted by hand.

Do you have a reason for dismissing the forensics report or are you just making up lame excuses to not believe it because you don't want to for partisan reasons alone?

@Metal-Brain said
What was written about it?
Explain the relevance. Why did you bring it up?

Your position seems to be the mere mention of Venezuela in the report makes the report invalid. Either it means something or it doesn't. Since you are evading explaining the relevance I am guessing it means nothing.

Do you have a reason for dismissing the forensics report or are you just making up lame excuses to not believe it because you don't want to for partisan reasons alone?

I asked YOU to explain it. It dont make sense. There's no forensics involved.

@wildgrass said
I asked YOU to explain it. It dont make sense. There's no forensics involved.

No, I asked you to explain it and you will not.
Relevance?

@sonhouse said
Politicians lie no doubt but so do you, AT LEAST as much if not more. You are a communists, that right there tells you where your agendas lie.

I didn't lie and you know it. You are projecting your lies again.

@Suzianne said
EXCEPT.

Buying votes doesn't happen. The voting system is secure. People are free to vote for whomever they want to vote for. The ballot is still secret. "Buying votes" is always problematic because you could take their money and then still vote for whom you want to vote for. It's impossible to track. Most states have made putting ballots in a collection box that ar ...[text shortened]...
MORE people vote when it is made easier, not harder. And THAT is what scares the Republican Party.

Buying votes happens. Usually cash cigs and liquor. You are a liar. There was a list of convictions I found long ago so stop lying.

@Metal-Brain said
No, I asked you to explain it and you will not.
Relevance?

You keep claiming it's a forensic analysis but can't explain it?

@Metal-Brain said
You don't need voting machines if you are going to count the ballots by hand.
What good are they? You just made the case for abolishing voting machines. Now you know why the UK does not waste money on them. Why are we?

You don't need steam shovels; a thousand guys with tablespoons could dig holes.

Electronic voting machines can tabulate results far more quickly than hand counts saving substantial amounts of money. The latter are only used in the relative few elections where the vote is extremely close (as determined by State law generally 1% or less of a margin). Those hand counts almost never change the machine results winner.

@wildgrass said
You keep claiming it's a forensic analysis but can't explain it?

Explain what? You never asked me to explain the forensic analysis. It is the only forensic analysis there is. What is your problem with it? You are the one evading questions here, not me.

Your problem is that you don't want to believe it for partisan reasons and you have no other reasons that make any sense. You brought up Venezuela ans now you don't want to talk about Venezuela anymore. Just admit you are grasping at straws because you have nothing.

Nobody has proven the forensic analysis wrong. People like Benson called it lies with no evidence of lies. You wanted to believe her so you did so in a leap of faith. You have nothing. The qualifications of the author are outstanding.

The reason no other forensic analysis has been done is because it would just confirm his findings. So they did nothing but lie.

@Metal-Brain said
Explain what? You never asked me to explain the forensic analysis. It is the only forensic analysis there is. What is your problem with it? You are the one evading questions here, not me.

Your problem is that you don't want to believe it for partisan reasons and you have no other reasons that make any sense. You brought up Venezuela ans now you don't want to talk abou ...[text shortened]... c analysis has been done is because it would just confirm his findings. So they did nothing but lie.

I asked you multiple times to explain it. Explain anything. For example, What forensic analysis links dominion voting to Venezuela?

@no1marauder said
You don't need steam shovels; a thousand guys with tablespoons could dig holes.

Electronic voting machines can tabulate results far more quickly than hand counts saving substantial amounts of money. The latter are only used in the relative few elections where the vote is extremely close (as determined by State law generally 1% or less of a margin). Those hand counts almost never change the machine results winner.

How do you establish the vote is extremely close? The voting machine.
Voting machines are unreliable and in some cases hackable. Not buying voting machines is what would save money.

The UK doesn't use them for good reasons. Counting ballots by hand is the only safe way to count votes. And it is not just the UK. The Netherlands doesn't use them either.

https://www.newsweek.com/dutch-election-electronic-voting-hacking-russia-france-macron-trump-clinton-564198

@wildgrass said
I asked you multiple times to explain it. Explain anything. For example, What forensic analysis links dominion voting to Venezuela?

I never made any such claim and you know it. I am still waiting for you to explain what Venezuela has to do with any of this. What part of the report do you have a problem with? Anything?

You have nothing. You brought up Venezuela and now you don't want to talk about it anymore. Just admit you have nothing and you were duped by some fake fact checker again that lied to you.

@Metal-Brain said
I never made any such claim and you know it. I am still waiting for you to explain what Venezuela has to do with any of this. What part of the report do you have a problem with? Anything?

You have nothing. You brought up Venezuela and now you don't want to talk about it anymore. Just admit you have nothing and you were duped by some fake fact checker again that lied to you.

For the third time, the same question: Why was Venezuela in your forensic report?

@wildgrass said
For the third time, the same question: Why was Venezuela in your forensic report?

Venezuela was in the forensics report? What did it say about Venezuela? I keep asking you that and you keep evading the question. Did you actually read the report or did you read some fake fact checker that claimed Venezuela was in the report and was not?

Post an excerpt. Do you think you can evade this question forever? You brought up Venezuela, not me. Relevance?