“Americans Must Stand Up to the Fraud. Kari Lake Did that. Thank God for Kari Lake!”

[Faun]

Last *really* doesn't understand what's going on. He doesn't understand the legal standards that Lake is going to have to meet. Last doesn't get that the legal threshold for intervention on election outcomes in Arizona.....is fraud that would have changed the outcome.

Lake will have to prove that. 17000 times. And she can't prove it once.

This case is going nowhere.

And then FruitLoops, a.k.a. Lastamender, will once again cry how the judge was biased and add him to his conspiracy.

the Department of Justice can't be trusted ...voters can’t be trusted ... the poll workers can’t be trusted ... the voting machines can’t be trusted ... the canvasing boards can't be trusted ... the recounts can't be trusted ... the audits can't be trusted ... Democrats can't be trusted ... Republicans can't be trusted ... the media can’t be trusted ... the news can't be trusted ... Sydney Powell can't be trusted ... Lin Wood can't be trusted ... William Barr can’t be trusted ... Christopher Wray can't be trusted ... the guy who was in charge of election security can’t be trusted ... Georgia's Republican Secretary of State can't be trusted ... Gabriel Sterling, his Republican COO and Trump voter, can't be trusted ... the Republican-led Maricopa board of elections can't be trusted ... the Racine board of elections can't be trusted ... Mike Pence can't be trusted ... the pillow guy can't be trusted ... Cyber Ninja's can't be trusted ... the Arizona audit can't be trusted ... the Wisconsin audit can't be trusted ... the Wisconsin Attorney General can't be trusted ... state authorities can't be trusted ... the lower courts can’t be trusted ... the appellate courts can’t be trusted ... the Supreme Court can’t be trusted ... the United States Congress can't be trusted ...

But Donald Trump can be trusted.​

 

[San Souci]

The REAL crimes get investigated starting Jan 3 2023. Suck it up ,ya goddam Commie.

 

[Faun]

The REAL crimes get investigated starting Jan 3 2023. Suck it up ,ya goddam Commie.

 

[Skylar]

The REAL crimes get investigated starting Jan 3 2023. Suck it up ,ya goddam Commie.

What 'real crime'? Your ilk have lead with accusations that they then scramble to find evidence to support.

The birther conspiracy? The Big Lie? Ray Epps? ALmost anything Mike Lindell has said in the last 2 years?

But this time its different?

 

[San Souci]

What 'real crime'? Your ilk have lead with accusations that they then scramble to find evidence to support.

The birther conspiracy? The Big Lie? Ray Epps? ALmost anything Mike Lindell has said in the last 2 years?

But this time its different?

Insider Trading?(Pelosi). Inciting to RIOT? (Waters). Lying to Congress? (Schiff). Graft? (The Biden Family). Take your fuckin' pick. Ray Epps? video of ray epps at capitol - Bing video

 

[Skylar]

Insider Trading?(Pelosi). Inciting to RIOT? (Waters). Lying to Congress? (Schiff). Graft? (The Biden Family). Take your fuckin' pick. Ray Epps? video of ray epps at capitol - Bing video

Show us the evidence. You're going to need to be really specific.

Given that you're demanding investigations, you're strongly suggesting you're looking for the evidence you don't have. Which really puts you at a disadvantage on your whole 'real crimes' schtick.

Your ilk starts with the conspiracy and tries to find the evidence for it after. How's that working out for you?

 

[Skylar]

“Evidence is not before the Court at the motion to dismiss stage – pleadings, made under the auspices of Rule 11 (the rule governing sanctions) are,” the judge wrote. “Accordingly, Plaintiff must show at trial that the BOD printer malfunctions were intentional, and directed to affect the results of the election, and that such actions did actually affect the outcome.”

So when Kari Lake predictably fails to meet this high, high legal bar of actual evidence........my question is this:

What sniveling, pathetic excuses will her followers give for why she lost?

Again

 

[Lastamender]

LOL

That guy doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. He idiotically claims Lake doesn't have to prove malfeasance; she just has to prove the machines malfunctioned. Unadulterated bullshit. I guess he doesn't know the judge already threw out 8 of Lake's 10 complaints. Of the two he permitted to proceed, was Lake's claim that there was "intentional misconduct." That means she has to prove there was "intentional misconduct," not just prove the machines malfunctioned.

We will see.

 

[Skylar]

We will see.

No, we won't. The judge laid out the requirements.

“Evidence is not before the Court at the motion to dismiss stage – pleadings, made under the auspices of Rule 11 (the rule governing sanctions) are,” the judge wrote. “Accordingly, Plaintiff must show at trial that the BOD printer malfunctions were intentional, and directed to affect the results of the election, and that such actions did actually affect the outcome.”

Like the elections your ilk keep losing, merely ignoring the outcomes that you don't like.....doesn't amount to much.

The only real question is what excuse you're going to give when she losses here too.

 

[Lastamender]

“Evidence is not before the Court at the motion to dismiss stage – pleadings, made under the auspices of Rule 11 (the rule governing sanctions) are,” the judge wrote. “Accordingly, Plaintiff must show at trial that the BOD printer malfunctions were intentional, and directed to affect the results of the election, and that such actions did actually affect the outcome.”

So when Kari Lake predictably fails to meet this high, high legal bar of actual evidence........my question is this:

What sniveling, pathetic excuses will her followers give for why she lost?

Again

I hope she gets to audit the machines if they expect her to prove it.

 

[Skylar]

I hope she gets to audit the machines if they expect her to prove it.

She'll need evidence to justify the search. And she doesn't have that either.

This is always your problem, Last. You make your accusations, then scramble desperately for evidence to back it up.

And predictably, fail. Leaving you with a mouthful of ash......and another batch of useless, empty accusations.

 

[Lastamender]

She'll need evidence to justify the search. And she doesn't have that either.

This is always your problem, Last. You make your accusations, then scramble desperately for evidence to back it up.

And predictably, fail. Leaving you with a mouthful of ash......and another batch of useless, empty accusations.

Why wouldn't they be transparent if there was no fraud? Lake should get to audit those machines.

 

[Skylar]

Why wouldn't they be transparent if there was no fraud? Lake should get to audit those machines.

Why claim fraud if you have no evidence of it?

I mean, other than unearned entitlement, a lack of personal responsibility, and a conservatives obsessive need to build their identity around being a victim.

 

[Lastamender]

Why claim fraud if you have no evidence of it?

I mean, other than unearned entitlement, a lack of personal responsibility, and a conservatives obsessive need to build their identity around being a victim.

A 10 pt. lead in the polls is a good reason to me. The last part of your post is projection. If we thought we were victims we would be Democrats. The victim here are the values that come with common sense.

 

[Skylar]

A 10 pt. lead in the polls is a good reason to me. The last part of your post is projection. If we thought we were victims we would be Democrats.

She didn't have a 10 point lead in the polls.

Which you know. But you make up leads that Lake didn't have to justify a conspiracy fantasy for which you have no evidence. If your arguments had merit, you wouldn't need to support it with your imagination.

I ask again.....why claim fraud if you have no evidence of it?

 

[Lastamender]

She didn't have a 10 point lead in the polls.

View attachment 740574
Which you know. But you make up leads that Lake didn't have to justify a conspiracy fantasy for which you have no evidence. If your arguments had merit, you wouldn't need to support it with your imagination.

I ask again.....why claim fraud if you have no evidence of it?

She had it some polls. You know how that works.

 

[Skylar]

She had it some polls. You know how that works.

She had it in 1 poll. She didn't have it in the other 28 polls.

Her average lead was about 3.5%. Which even Real Clear Politics called a toss up, as the lead was within their statistical margin of error. They said the same thing about Clinton v. Trump in 2016 when Hillary lead by 3.2%.

And lost too.

Again, why would you insist it was fraud if you don't have the evidence.

 

[Lastamender]

She had it in 1 poll. She didn't have it in the other 28 polls.

Her average lead was about 3.5%. Which even Real Clear Politics called a toss up, as the lead was within their statistical margin of error. They said the same thing about Clinton v. Trump in 2016 when Hillary lead by 3.2%.

And lost too.

Again, why would you insist it was fraud if you don't have the evidence.

Maybe we should wait and see what she has. There are whistle blowers.

 

[Skylar]

Maybe we should wait and see what she has. There are whistle blowers.

And when Kari Lake predictably fails to meet the extremely high bar of evidence she must to succeed, will you accept the outcome of the trial?

Or will you even more predictably fold the judge and the judiciary into your wildly complicated conspiracy?

You know, like you've done every other time your legal predictions have failed.

 

[Lastamender]

And when Kari Lake predictably fails to meet the extremely high bar of evidence she must to succeed, will you accept the outcome of the trial?

Or will you even more predictably fold the judge and the judiciary into your wildly complicated conspiracy?

You know, like you've done every other time your legal predictions have failed.

Lake should have won that election. Tucker said if she loses it will be fraud. It was obvious to the whole country she had the votes to win.