A logical and empirical look at Election Fraud in 2020

Anyone really concerned about the "lies about the election" would winder why the DP legal teams failed to file motions for Rule 11 sanctions to expose those "lies" in November.

Those dogs did not even bark - let alone bite.

 

This has been answered multiple times.

The question I asked you has NOT been answered.

 

I know for a fact 'fraud' was committed. Guy I work with filled out his wifes and his sons ballots because they weren't going to and mailed them in.
So 'yes' fraud was committed. I think the real question being asked is 'was enough fraud committed to change the out come of the election.
THAT is the real question.

 

Not one word of that is true.

 

Every bit of that is true.

 

LOL! Then why didn't the DP's lawyers hit those awful RP lawyers with motions for Rule 11 sanctions?

Who told you that election fraud was statistically insignificant?

"49. Unsurprisingly, voter fraud is likewise notoriously common in New Jersey. Examples abound over the last decade.
• In 2010, over a dozen people were arrested and charged with voter fraud and tampering with absentee ballots to get Councilman Rigo Rodriguez elected in Paterson, New Jersey. Councilman Rodriguez won the election by just 41 votes in a recount after 49 previously uncounted absentee ballots were included in the final tally. He and his wife were later arrested on charges of witness tampering in an effort to cover up the voter fraud. Rodriguez ended up serving his entire four-year city- council term before agreeing to a permanent ban from holding office in exchange for the charges to be dropped.
• In 2012, a Belleville resident was found guilty of election fraud, conspiracy, absentee-ballot fraud, forgery, and tampering with public records or information.
12
Case 3:20-cv-10753-MAS-ZNQ Document 1 Filed 08/18/20 Page 13 of 37 PageID: 13
Along with his co-conspirators, he tampered with documentation for absentee ballots in the November 2007 general election by submitting ballots on behalf of voters who had never received the ballot nor cast a vote.
• In 2015, a Hoboken resident pleaded guilty to using the mail system to aid a voter- bribery scheme. He provided voters with applications for mail-in ballots, offered them payment for casting them for a certain candidate, reviewed the ballots, and then delivered funds to voters after the election.
• In 2018, another Hoboken resident pleaded guilty to conspiracy to use mail to promote a voter bribery scheme during the 2013 municipal election. She and her associates (at the direction of a city council candidate) agreed to pay voters $50 each in exchange for mail-in votes. The city council candidate was convicted the following year due to the scheme.
• In 2019, Elmwood Park’s mayor resigned from his position in the face of charges of election fraud. Investigators determined that between March 2017 and November 2018, the mayor “had interfered with the secrecy of the election process by completing portions of the application for vote by mail ballot, primary election ballot certifications and general election ballot certifications of registered voters in the borough.”
50. These are just a handful of the many examples of voter fraud and impropriety that have occurred in New Jersey."

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, NEW JERSEY REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PHILIP D. MURPHY, in his official capacity as Governor of New Jersey, TAHESHA WAY, in her official capacity as Secretary of State of New Jersey,
Defendants.

Case 3:20-cv-10753-MAS-ZNQ
Document 1
Filed 08/18/20

 

This after you have read pleadings alleging massive election fraud. They even documehere they are challenging nted the fact that massive election fraud has been common in the jurisdictions where they are challenging the integrity of the election.

"49. Unsurprisingly, voter fraud is likewise notoriously common in New Jersey. Examples abound over the last decade.
• In 2010, over a dozen people were arrested and charged with voter fraud and tampering with absentee ballots to get Councilman Rigo Rodriguez elected in Paterson, New Jersey. Councilman Rodriguez won the election by just 41 votes in a recount after 49 previously uncounted absentee ballots were included in the final tally. He and his wife were later arrested on charges of witness tampering in an effort to cover up the voter fraud. Rodriguez ended up serving his entire four-year city- council term before agreeing to a permanent ban from holding office in exchange for the charges to be dropped.
• In 2012, a Belleville resident was found guilty of election fraud, conspiracy, absentee-ballot fraud, forgery, and tampering with public records or information.
12
Case 3:20-cv-10753-MAS-ZNQ Document 1 Filed 08/18/20 Page 13 of 37 PageID: 13
Along with his co-conspirators, he tampered with documentation for absentee ballots in the November 2007 general election by submitting ballots on behalf of voters who had never received the ballot nor cast a vote.
• In 2015, a Hoboken resident pleaded guilty to using the mail system to aid a voter- bribery scheme. He provided voters with applications for mail-in ballots, offered them payment for casting them for a certain candidate, reviewed the ballots, and then delivered funds to voters after the election.
• In 2018, another Hoboken resident pleaded guilty to conspiracy to use mail to promote a voter bribery scheme during the 2013 municipal election. She and her associates (at the direction of a city council candidate) agreed to pay voters $50 each in exchange for mail-in votes. The city council candidate was convicted the following year due to the scheme.
• In 2019, Elmwood Park’s mayor resigned from his position in the face of charges of election fraud. Investigators determined that between March 2017 and November 2018, the mayor “had interfered with the secrecy of the election process by completing portions of the application for vote by mail ballot, primary election ballot certifications and general election ballot certifications of registered voters in the borough.”
50. These are just a handful of the many examples of voter fraud and impropriety that have occurred in New Jersey."

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC., REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, NEW JERSEY REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

PHILIP D. MURPHY, in his official capacity as Governor of New Jersey, TAHESHA WAY, in her official capacity as Secretary of State of New Jersey,
Defendants.

Case 3:20-cv-10753-MAS-ZNQ
Document 1
Filed 08/18/20"

Who told you that election fraud was rare in the US?

 

So you think that the Trump lawyers filed false pleadings, but that wasn't important enough for the DP lawyers to file motions for Rule 11 sanctions.
You should read the Rule 11 FRCP.

 

That is not responsive to anything from my post.

 

LOL! You are dodging my questions. You should just answer them. It will only hurt for a second.

 

Not one Trump lawsuit alleged fraud. Every time a judge asked a trump layer, in court, trumps lawyers specifically stated they are not alleging fraud. This is all a matter of public record.

Every single investigation ever done on the subject.

 

Why did trump appointed judges fall for it. Because they are conspiracy theories. Not based on evidence, only hearsay.

 

Just lies from the fraud legal team. Who would not even admit to the judges fraud is the claim.

 

Fake News. There is no acceptable level of fraud.

There is no acceptable level of fraud.

This is known. We need greater certainty that the mailed ballot is going to a legal voter and secure signature matching to ensure that the ballot returned is from a legal voter.

There is no acceptable level of voter fraud. Dems need to quit fighting so hard to make sure that fraud can occur. We do not want our elections to devolve into a system of who is better at cheating.

Fake News:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations ....​

If the situation still remains, where Democrats can steal the presidency by stealing a handful of cities then get ready for changes. This one simple change, to the system that NE and ME already use and have for decades, means that if Dems steal the hell out of a city, they may win that city, but they don't win the entire state, though they could steal the two ECV that are awarded based on Statewide totals. So keep arguing how the fraud is fine because it "doesn't exceed the margin" when the fraud is part of the margin and you don't know what the margin is going to be until after the votes are already counted and fraud has already occurred. It's not an argument that holds up. Thee is no acceptable level of voter fraud. One way or another, it will be dealt with.

Elections that aren't trustworthy are unacceptable.

Yes, and they'll pick up some in CA, NY, IL, and the various other Red State areas currently dominated by a Big Blue City or so that leaves them nothing more than spectators in Presidential elections. This change will return Presidential politics to a Fifty State affair, but, the main thing, is no more stolen presidential elections because of all this cheating in these Big Blue Cities. Everyone knows that Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia and you could probably add several citie to that list, probably haven't had an honest ballot in 50 years. That will either get cleaned up, or, we'll limit the damage by awarding ECV by CD.

Unless Congress steps in.

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations ...​

A clear example of Congress’ choice to override state election rules is the Voting Rights Act of 1965, protecting minority voters from being denied equality at the polls.

The Supreme Court has ruled plainly that the task assigned to state legislatures by Section 4 is not a power the states have as sovereign entities, but a task handed down to them to act in place of Congress, subject to congressional veto or alteration.

Either the elections in these Blue Cities will be cleaned up and brought under control or their ability to taint a presidential election will be limited.

 

I didn't say there was. I said it's irrational to claim the election was stolen. It's also irrational to respond "fake news" to something you disagree with. Fake news refers to the dissemination of false narratives posing as "news".

When you believe someone is mistaken, that does not mean they are spreading "fake news". You should try to broaden your vocabulary. In this case, I was not mistaken. You extracted a description of elections for Congress, not the awarding of electoral votes, as I was describing.

You're conflating the protection of voting rights of individuals with the awarding of electoral votes. Here is the relevant clause:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress

This reflects what I said: the US Congress cannot tell states how to award electoral votes. You were mistaken.

 

I agree, massive organized voter fraud just is not possible. Someone would talk or get caught, and then it would fall like a house of cards.

I think maybe it is just easier for some to accept the conspiracy.

 

Well that is what this thread is for, why do believe that? Instead of decades, less start at say 1980.

And for the record, I absolutely characterize the Trump team wanting to throw out mail in ballots in the middle of a pandemic as voter suppression. Outside of that, I don't buy into the voter suppression thing to much. No one is being prevented from voting.

 

Thank you! I know I am not the best communicator, but I thought my point was made in the OP.

Thank you!

 

At this point, we have no solid evidence of voter fraud on the scale that could have shifted the outcome. This of course does not prove that it did not happen nor that proof does not exist- only that at this point, we lack the proof. This is not unlike many instances of crime and fraud; historically we have thousands of unsolved and unproven criminal acts. What we do have is circumstances surrounding the election that are questionable in themselves- loaded with what a magician would call mis-direction, and an outcome that defies a substantial number of logical parameters. Take this article, for example.

President-elect Joe Biden defied key "non-polling metrics" to defeat President Trump in a way that is "not statistically impossible, but it's statistically implausible," pollster Patrick Basham told Fox News' "Life, Liberty & Levin" in an interview airing Sunday night.

Basham, the founding director of the Democracy Institute, explained to host Mark Levin that there are "a dozen or more of these metrics ... [that] have a 100% accuracy rate in terms of predicting the winner of the presidential election."

Those metrics, according to Basham, include "party registration trends, how the candidates did in their respective presidential primaries, the number of individual donations, [and] how much enthusiasm each candidate generated in the opinion polls."

"In 2016, they all indicated strongly that Donald Trump would win against most of the public polling," Basham said. "That was again the case in 2020. So if we are to accept that Biden won against the trend of all these non-polling metrics, it not only means that one of these metrics was inaccurate ... for the first time ever, it means that each one of these metrics was wrong for the first time and at the same time as all of the others."

( https://www.foxnews.com/politics/20...-biden-donald-trump-patrick-basham-mark-levin )

If you go to a really good magic show in Vegas, you can join perhaps a thousand others to see elephants disappear to be replaced by a tin cup, people teleported from one place to another and watch impossible things happen.
When the show is over, every one of those people still know that none of what appeared to happen really happened; none of them came to believe that they saw genuine magic instead of an illusion.

Thus when someone throws a few nickels on the floor and they all end up standing on edge, we know that deception has taken place. We may not know how it was done- but we do know with a high degree of certainty that it was done. The odds of a single dropped nickle landing on edge are 6,000 to one. The we have the issue of moral restraint, of the limits of behavior. We have seen a multitude of plots over the last four years that would say moral factors have been displaced by hate. The infamous "Dossier" for example. Anyone who could be behind that is capable of anything else, morally. Next, we have the necessity of people having to over-ride obvious elements of disqualification- Bidens health, his quite apparent increasing mental issues, the limitations of age- and then, the fact that no candidate ever has conducted a successful campaign by staying in his own basement, while his opposition was doing 2-3 successful rallies a day. The reasons to question the validity of the end result greatly outnumber the reason not to.

The best deceptions, frauds, thefts- are those where people don't even realize or believe they have been deceived.
Bottom line- we cannot prove fraud occurred at this point; we may never be able to. Some will believe the elephant really did hide inside the tin cup.

 

Very broadly, I understand where you are coming from. I feel very disenfranchised with the number of people in the GOP that feel the election was stolen, just as I felt disenfranchised when the other side did this in '16. With both sides wanting to radically alter our elections and/or claiming fraud every time they lose, it is surprising this has not happened before.

I have not seen anyone in GOP leadership defend the 1-6 rioters in any way. I am pretty sure everyone in both parties condemns those actions. Believing that faith in our elections is a serious problem and Trump should not be impeached is not the same thing as supporting insurrection. We should remember that distinction.

 

I think if both sides could take a reasoned approach like this then changes of power could be smoother and met with less resistance. I have seen several polls where a high percentage of the losing party always believes elections are unfair and the winner overwhelmingly believes the opposite. Some of our politicians run on not much more than this, like Stacy Abrams and Donald Trump.

 

I agree, but at the same time we are setting dangerous precedent.

 

LOL! If you really believe that you have to wonder why the DP lawyers did not file motions for Rule 11 sanctions for all these false pleadings.

You have obviously been misinformed by your sources.

“See Rodes, Ripple & Mooney, Sanctions Imposable for Violations of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 64–65, Federal Judicial Center (1981). The new language is intended to reduce the reluctance of courts to impose sanctions, see Moore, Federal Practice 7.05, at 1547, by emphasizing the responsibilities of the attorney and reenforcing those obligations by the imposition of sanctions.

The amended rule attempts to deal with the problem by building upon and expanding the equitable doctrine permitting the court to award expenses, including attorney's fees, to a litigant whose opponent acts in bad faith in instituting or conducting litigation. See, e.g., Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, (1980); Hall v. Cole, 412 U.S. 1, 5 (1973). Greater attention by the district courts to pleading and motion abuses and the imposition of sanctions when appropriate, should discourage dilatory or abusive tactics and help to streamline the litigation process by lessening frivolous claims or defenses.

The expanded nature of the lawyer's certification in the fifth sentence of amended Rule 11 recognizes that the litigation process may be abused for purposes other than delay. See, e.g., Browning Debenture Holders’ Committee v. DASA Corp., 560 F.2d 1078 (2d Cir. 1977).”

• CORNELL LAW LEGAL INFORMATION INSTITUTE, LII Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions, Rule 11. Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_11

 

Thank you. It really doesn't take guts to call BS when you see it though, we have just grown so accustomed to digging in and holding the line at all costs. I am just a centrist who refuse to be a puppet. I tried to vote for policy and ignore the politician.

As soon as Trump started with the stolen election nonsense, I knew the GOP was going to make a serious mistake by backing him.

 

Why would you expect RP judged to sanction Republican lawyers without a complaint from the DP legal team?

I hear you loud and clear. So, why didn't the DP legal team move to sanction all these "false" pleadings?

Ever read "The Hound of The Baskervilles"?
Hint: the dog did not bark.