ARIZONA BALLOT INSPECTIONS COMPLETED – Huge Preliminary Report Expected Monday

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Democrats are liars and cheaters.
There will either be more ballots than voters, or there will be a higher ballot count than ballots.

 

[bodecea]

This is what I am constantly trolled about, as anyone can see because those trolling posts are not deleted. But this is not about the obvious bias this is about the audit in AZ. and the results.
BREAKING UPDATE: HISTORY MADE AS FINAL ARIZONA BALLOT INSPECTIONS COMPLETED - Huge Preliminary Report Expected Monday When True Number of Ballot Totals Announced

Let me guess,

1. they will find more "evidence" of widespread fraud but will somehow not file a single complaint in court. The reason for this, of course, is because the "evidence" is total garbage.
2. There will be no police investigation based on this evidence either. For the same reason.
3. You will cite these outcomes going forward as some sort of proof.
4. When asked why they never brought it to court; you'll fall back to the conspiracy theory of the courts being corrupt so they didn't file a complaint.
5. And you will continue to swear there was fraud even though not a single complaint was filed after this supposed finding of evidence.

How do I know this?

The "investigations" into 9/11 went exactly the same way.

What do you think all those people coming forward giving affidavits was? were?

Do you know what an affidavit is? Really?

What about all the people telling their State senators they wanted a forensic audit were?

Not sure...what do you think they were?

What that is, is democracy working not being destroyed. Hit the bricks traitor.

Democracy? That is when they count the votes and declare a winner. That is what happened in the 2020 election.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

They don't until they are submitted into evidence in a court of law.

here's your problem the courts didn't want to get involved with the election that doesn't change the fact that these affidavits are evidence collection for the courts.

"the courts didn't want to get involved".....you realize that in THIS country (not sure what country you are from), crimes are proving to be crimes in a court of law....with evidence and testimony under oath.

 

[bodecea]

Democrats are liars and cheaters.
There will either be more ballots than voters, or there will be a higher ballot count than ballots.

Tissue?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is what I am constantly trolled about, as anyone can see because those trolling posts are not deleted. But this is not about the obvious bias this is about the audit in AZ. and the results.
BREAKING UPDATE: HISTORY MADE AS FINAL ARIZONA BALLOT INSPECTIONS COMPLETED - Huge Preliminary Report Expected Monday When True Number of Ballot Totals Announced

Let me guess,

1. they will find more "evidence" of widespread fraud but will somehow not file a single complaint in court. The reason for this, of course, is because the "evidence" is total garbage.
2. There will be no police investigation based on this evidence either. For the same reason.
3. You will cite these outcomes going forward as some sort of proof.
4. When asked why they never brought it to court; you'll fall back to the conspiracy theory of the courts being corrupt so they didn't file a complaint.
5. And you will continue to swear there was fraud even though not a single complaint was filed after this supposed finding of evidence.

How do I know this?

The "investigations" into 9/11 went exactly the same way.

What do you think all those people coming forward giving affidavits was? were?

Do you know what an affidavit is? Really?

What about all the people telling their State senators they wanted a forensic audit were?

Not sure...what do you think they were?

What that is, is democracy working not being destroyed. Hit the bricks traitor.

Democracy? That is when they count the votes and declare a winner. That is what happened in the 2020 election.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

They don't until they are submitted into evidence in a court of law.

here's your problem the courts didn't want to get involved with the election that doesn't change the fact that these affidavits are evidence collection for the courts.

"the courts didn't want to get involved".....you realize that in THIS country (not sure what country you are from), crimes are proving to be crimes in a court of law....with evidence and testimony under oath.

that's right they did not want to get involved

 

[L.K.Eder]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

 

[L.K.Eder]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

fuck you I am so glad I personally got to kick the shit out of a few germans while I live there maybe you were one of them

 

[bodecea]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

You are correct....it negates it as evidence. You got nothing.

 

[L.K.Eder]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

fuck you I am so glad I personally got to kick the shit out of a few germans while I live there maybe you were one of them

nice. I did not have contact with fat dumb American twats, so i guess i missed you.

 

[bodecea]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

fuck you I am so glad I personally got to kick the shit out of a few germans while I live there maybe you were one of them

Oh look! A pretend tough guy......really a Kowardly Keyboard Kommando.

 

[bodecea]

This is what I am constantly trolled about, as anyone can see because those trolling posts are not deleted. But this is not about the obvious bias this is about the audit in AZ. and the results.
BREAKING UPDATE: HISTORY MADE AS FINAL ARIZONA BALLOT INSPECTIONS COMPLETED - Huge Preliminary Report Expected Monday When True Number of Ballot Totals Announced

Let me guess,

1. they will find more "evidence" of widespread fraud but will somehow not file a single complaint in court. The reason for this, of course, is because the "evidence" is total garbage.
2. There will be no police investigation based on this evidence either. For the same reason.
3. You will cite these outcomes going forward as some sort of proof.
4. When asked why they never brought it to court; you'll fall back to the conspiracy theory of the courts being corrupt so they didn't file a complaint.
5. And you will continue to swear there was fraud even though not a single complaint was filed after this supposed finding of evidence.

How do I know this?

The "investigations" into 9/11 went exactly the same way.

What do you think all those people coming forward giving affidavits was? were?

Do you know what an affidavit is? Really?

What about all the people telling their State senators they wanted a forensic audit were?

Not sure...what do you think they were?

What that is, is democracy working not being destroyed. Hit the bricks traitor.

Democracy? That is when they count the votes and declare a winner. That is what happened in the 2020 election.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

They don't until they are submitted into evidence in a court of law.

here's your problem the courts didn't want to get involved with the election that doesn't change the fact that these affidavits are evidence collection for the courts.

"the courts didn't want to get involved".....you realize that in THIS country (not sure what country you are from), crimes are proving to be crimes in a court of law....with evidence and testimony under oath.

that's right they did not want to get involved

Brave patriots, eh? More likely LIARS who know they do not want to go under oath. Perjury is a serious crime.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

You are correct....it negates it as evidence. You got nothing.

I said it does not negate the fact the affidavits are evidence

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

fuck you I am so glad I personally got to kick the shit out of a few germans while I live there maybe you were one of them

Oh look! A pretend tough guy......really a Kowardly Keyboard Kommando.

acts of the past sure in hell made me a tough guy

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is what I am constantly trolled about, as anyone can see because those trolling posts are not deleted. But this is not about the obvious bias this is about the audit in AZ. and the results.
BREAKING UPDATE: HISTORY MADE AS FINAL ARIZONA BALLOT INSPECTIONS COMPLETED - Huge Preliminary Report Expected Monday When True Number of Ballot Totals Announced

Let me guess,

1. they will find more "evidence" of widespread fraud but will somehow not file a single complaint in court. The reason for this, of course, is because the "evidence" is total garbage.
2. There will be no police investigation based on this evidence either. For the same reason.
3. You will cite these outcomes going forward as some sort of proof.
4. When asked why they never brought it to court; you'll fall back to the conspiracy theory of the courts being corrupt so they didn't file a complaint.
5. And you will continue to swear there was fraud even though not a single complaint was filed after this supposed finding of evidence.

How do I know this?

The "investigations" into 9/11 went exactly the same way.

What do you think all those people coming forward giving affidavits was? were?

Do you know what an affidavit is? Really?

What about all the people telling their State senators they wanted a forensic audit were?

Not sure...what do you think they were?

What that is, is democracy working not being destroyed. Hit the bricks traitor.

Democracy? That is when they count the votes and declare a winner. That is what happened in the 2020 election.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

They don't until they are submitted into evidence in a court of law.

here's your problem the courts didn't want to get involved with the election that doesn't change the fact that these affidavits are evidence collection for the courts.

"the courts didn't want to get involved".....you realize that in THIS country (not sure what country you are from), crimes are proving to be crimes in a court of law....with evidence and testimony under oath.

that's right they did not want to get involved

Brave patriots, eh? More likely LIARS who know they do not want to go under oath. Perjury is a serious crime.

you're a leftist you were born to lie

 

[L.K.Eder]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

fuck you I am so glad I personally got to kick the shit out of a few germans while I live there maybe you were one of them

Oh look! A pretend tough guy......really a Kowardly Keyboard Kommando.

acts of the past sure in hell made me a tough guy

^^^

 

[bodecea]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

You are correct....it negates it as evidence. You got nothing.

I said it does not negate the fact the affidavits are evidence

Then you are wrong....it does negate the FACT....if they are unwilling to go under oath, they got nothing.....probably afraid of perjury charges.

 

[bodecea]

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

It all depends what they say. If the affidavit testifies to witnessing a crime, then they carry great weight. But if all they do is report suspicious activity, they're meaningless. If they just repeat hearsay, they're worthless. If they're vague about what they witnessed, they're worthless.

are you saying election fraud is not a crime?

Of course it's a crime......ergo it requires evidence. Got any?

eyewitness accounts was your evidence

And those eyewitness's have testified in a court of law under oath?

the courts refused to invoitself with the election does nnegate the fact the affidavits ae evidence

well queefed, vegetable.

I've told you once I've told you many times you have the IQ of a vegetable
say in Germany you fucking nazi

ok, peewee. very interesting. sober up.

fuck you I am so glad I personally got to kick the shit out of a few germans while I live there maybe you were one of them

Oh look! A pretend tough guy......really a Kowardly Keyboard Kommando.

acts of the past sure in hell made me a tough guy

^^^
View attachment 507104

Gee....spot on there.

 

[bodecea]

This is what I am constantly trolled about, as anyone can see because those trolling posts are not deleted. But this is not about the obvious bias this is about the audit in AZ. and the results.
BREAKING UPDATE: HISTORY MADE AS FINAL ARIZONA BALLOT INSPECTIONS COMPLETED - Huge Preliminary Report Expected Monday When True Number of Ballot Totals Announced

Let me guess,

1. they will find more "evidence" of widespread fraud but will somehow not file a single complaint in court. The reason for this, of course, is because the "evidence" is total garbage.
2. There will be no police investigation based on this evidence either. For the same reason.
3. You will cite these outcomes going forward as some sort of proof.
4. When asked why they never brought it to court; you'll fall back to the conspiracy theory of the courts being corrupt so they didn't file a complaint.
5. And you will continue to swear there was fraud even though not a single complaint was filed after this supposed finding of evidence.

How do I know this?

The "investigations" into 9/11 went exactly the same way.

What do you think all those people coming forward giving affidavits was? were?

Do you know what an affidavit is? Really?

What about all the people telling their State senators they wanted a forensic audit were?

Not sure...what do you think they were?

What that is, is democracy working not being destroyed. Hit the bricks traitor.

Democracy? That is when they count the votes and declare a winner. That is what happened in the 2020 election.

You seem to act if affidavit's have no legal weight

They don't until they are submitted into evidence in a court of law.

here's your problem the courts didn't want to get involved with the election that doesn't change the fact that these affidavits are evidence collection for the courts.

"the courts didn't want to get involved".....you realize that in THIS country (not sure what country you are from), crimes are proving to be crimes in a court of law....with evidence and testimony under oath.

that's right they did not want to get involved

Brave patriots, eh? More likely LIARS who know they do not want to go under oath. Perjury is a serious crime.

you're a leftist you were born to lie

Funny how your trump fluffers don't want to go under oath there, hun.