Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Load of Squit

President Biden

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

How about you commenting on Gen. Mark Milley who said that the drone strike that killed seven Afghan children was "a righteous strike".  Interesting choice of words, invoking God when Biden murders children.

Oh dear! Now you've given up completely on trying extricate yourself from your hilarious balls up by trying to change the subject. So please do return to your "proof" that under the US constitution Milley is guilty of treason. We could all do with another good laugh.

Interesting too that you have not said a word about your other totally incompetent balls-up of the claims in Woodward's and Costa's book "Peril". You claimed they showed Milley committed treason, Woodward said "The one courageous person was general Milley". Are you sure you actually used their book as the "source of data" which is what you claimed? (btw, we all know you haven't read a single page of the book).

You really ought to improve your attention span beyond that of the average goldfish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 7HAR1980 said:

You have to be immensely dense to believe the audit was about a recount and not widespread fraud or voter discrepancies.

Key points from the audit are very interesting. 

Would that be the audit that actually was a recount and found that Trump lost by more votes than orignially declared?

https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/trump-mocked-after-stop-the-steal-funded-recount-finds-he-lost-by-bigger-margin/

Trump Mocked After ‘Stop The Steal’ Funded Recount Finds He Lost By Bigger Margin

The audit that was ordered by the Republican run senate with the result that its Republican leader now accepts Trump was defeated fair and square:

Arizona Senate President Karen Fann, the Republican who paved the way for the so-called "full forensic audit" of 2.1 million ballots in Maricopa County, said the review's overall vote tally matched the initial results in November.

"Truth is truth, numbers are numbers," Fann said at a Senate hearing on the review, which found only small variations, yielding 99 additional votes for Biden and 261 fewer votes for Trump. "Those numbers were close, within a few hundred."

"Ben Ginsberg, a longtime Republican election lawyer who represented Republican George W. Bush when he prevailed over Democrat Al Gore in a 2000 electoral dispute, called the review's conclusions a "huge defeat" for Trump.

"This was Donald Trump's best chance to prove his cases of elections being rigged and fraudulent and they failed," Ginsberg said on a media call organized by the States United Democracy Center, a nonpartisan policy group."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/arizona-republicans-release-findings-widely-panned-election-audit-2021-09-24/

Hilariously, bringing further attention upon his sociopathic delusional state of mind, Trump described this personal defeat as, "a big win for democracy and a big win for us." Couldn't agree more with the first clause of that sentence, but perhaps that second clause explains why he still thinks he won. Could someone please explain to him that getting fewer votes than your opponent means you've lost.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/09/2021 at 14:57, 7HAR1980 said:

Assumptions, yet again.

Yes, and I assumed right. Pushing falsehoods about the election can only mean one thing. We see ya Son of Jools.👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Herman said:

Yes, and I assumed right. Pushing falsehoods about the election can only mean one thing. We see ya Son of Jools.👍

Assumptions yet again. You're not very good at this Herman. You could maybe DM Peter the deleter and ask him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Herman said:

Nah, I'll just use the block button again. Bye Jools.👍

Go for your life. P.S. I'm not Jools, just ask Pete👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, horsefly said:

Would that be the audit that actually was a recount and found that Trump lost by more votes than orignially declared?

https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/trump-mocked-after-stop-the-steal-funded-recount-finds-he-lost-by-bigger-margin/

Trump Mocked After ‘Stop The Steal’ Funded Recount Finds He Lost By Bigger Margin

The audit that was ordered by the Republican run senate with the result that its Republican leader now accepts Trump was defeated fair and square:

Arizona Senate President Karen Fann, the Republican who paved the way for the so-called "full forensic audit" of 2.1 million ballots in Maricopa County, said the review's overall vote tally matched the initial results in November.

"Truth is truth, numbers are numbers," Fann said at a Senate hearing on the review, which found only small variations, yielding 99 additional votes for Biden and 261 fewer votes for Trump. "Those numbers were close, within a few hundred."

"Ben Ginsberg, a longtime Republican election lawyer who represented Republican George W. Bush when he prevailed over Democrat Al Gore in a 2000 electoral dispute, called the review's conclusions a "huge defeat" for Trump.

"This was Donald Trump's best chance to prove his cases of elections being rigged and fraudulent and they failed," Ginsberg said on a media call organized by the States United Democracy Center, a nonpartisan policy group."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/arizona-republicans-release-findings-widely-panned-election-audit-2021-09-24/

Hilariously, bringing further attention upon his sociopathic delusional state of mind, Trump described this personal defeat as, "a big win for democracy and a big win for us." Couldn't agree more with the first clause of that sentence, but perhaps that second clause explains why he still thinks he won. Could someone please explain to him that getting fewer votes than your opponent means you've lost.

Forensic Audit = Recount 🤣🤣🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, horsefly said:

So you haven't worked out yet that they did a recount. Jesus, so very, very dumb! Please explain the following quote from the REPUBLICAN president of the Arizona senate Karen Fann when she commented on the RECOUNT:

"Truth is truth, numbers are numbers,"

Just to reiterate for you to make it as idiot proof as possible (although that's probably not possible in your case), the numbers she is referring to are the numbers arising from the RECOUNT (integral to the audit). Do try harder, it really isn't that difficult.

 

forensic
/fəˈrɛnsɪk/
 
adjective
  1. 1.
    relating to or denoting the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime.
    "forensic evidence"
     
  2. 2.
    relating to courts of law.
     
noun
  1. scientific tests or techniques used in connection with the detection of crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 7HAR1980 said:
forensic
/fəˈrɛnsɪk/
 
adjective
  1. 1.
    relating to or denoting the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime.
    "forensic evidence"
     
  2. 2.
    relating to courts of law.
     
noun
  1. scientific tests or techniques used in connection with the detection of crime.

counting


Also found in: ThesaurusMedicalLegalFinancialIdiomsEncyclopediaWikipedia.

count 1

  (kount)
v. count·edcount·ingcounts
v.tr.
1.
a. To name or list (the units of a group or collection) one by one in order to determine a total; number.
 
For example, counting the number of votes cast in an election.
 

re·count 2

 also re-count  (rē-kount′)
tr.v. re·count·ed, re·count·ing, re·counts also re-count·edre-count·ingre-counts
To count again.
n. recount (rē′kount′)
An additional count, especially a second count of votes cast in an election.

For example, the sort of thing that is done as an integral part of a "forensic audit" to ensure no cheating took place in an election. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, horsefly said:

counting


Also found in: ThesaurusMedicalLegalFinancialIdiomsEncyclopediaWikipedia.

count 1

  (kount)
v. count·edcount·ingcounts
v.tr.
1.
a. To name or list (the units of a group or collection) one by one in order to determine a total; number.
 
For example, counting the number of votes cast in an election.
 

re·count 2

 also re-count  (rē-kount′)
tr.v. re·count·ed, re·count·ing, re·counts also re-count·edre-count·ingre-counts
To count again.
n. recount (rē′kount′)
An additional count, especially a second count of votes cast in an election.

For example, the sort of thing that is done as an integral part of a "forensic audit" to ensure no cheating took place in an election. 

"integral part" but not the sole part of a forensic audit of which there are many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 7HAR1980 said:

"integral part" but not the sole part of a forensic audit of which there are many.

Ah! progress at last. You now realise that the audit included a recount as an integral part of the investigation. Now all you need to do is acknowledge, as the Republican president of the senate of Arizona does, that the recount of all the legal votes showed that Biden actually won by an increased margin than was originally declared. 

(Incidently, do feel free to point out where I claimed that the recount was the "sole part of a forensic audit". I'll save you the trouble, nowhere did I say that, but by all means waste an hour looking for it.). You and RTB are doing a fantastic job proving everything we have been saying about Trump supporters, keep it up! We need a good laugh in these dark times.

Edited by horsefly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/in-counterclaim-kraken-attorney-sidney-powell-sues-dominion-voting-systems-for-alleged-abuse-of-process-for-suing-her-first/

The kraken lady is back. 😀

In Counterclaim, ‘Kraken’ Attorney Sidney Powell Sues Dominion Voting Systems for Alleged ‘Abuse of Process’ for Suing Her First

I love the fact that her own lawyers have filed to have Dominion's case against her dismissed on the basis she is so bat crazy no one in their right mind would have believed what she said:

Powell’s attorneys in March filed court documents seeking to dismiss the suit by claiming that “no reasonable person” would believe that her well-publicized comments about an international plot against former President Donald Trump were “statements of fact.”

Armando Iannucci's career must be teetering on the brink!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, horsefly said:

I love the fact that her own lawyers have filed to have Dominion's case against her dismissed on the basis she is so bat crazy no one in their right mind would have believed what she said:

Powell’s attorneys in March filed court documents seeking to dismiss the suit by claiming that “no reasonable person” would believe that her well-publicized comments about an international plot against former President Donald Trump were “statements of fact.”

Armando Iannucci's career must be teetering on the brink!

 

FB_IMG_1632683351249.jpg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, horsefly said:

Ah! progress at last. You now realise that the audit included a recount as an integral part of the investigation. Now all you need to do is acknowledge, as the Republican president of the senate of Arizona does, that the recount of all the legal votes showed that Biden actually won by an increased margin than was originally declared. 

(Incidently, do feel free to point out where I claimed that the recount was the "sole part of a forensic audit". I'll save you the trouble, nowhere did I say that, but by all means waste an hour looking for it.). You and RTB are doing a fantastic job proving everything we have been saying about Trump supporters, keep it up! We need a good laugh in these dark times.

Didn't say you did though did I? 

Care to answer what other integral parts there are of a forensic audit other than a recount?

And for the record, I'm not surprised at the recount result.

Numbers are numbers indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 7HAR1980 said:

Didn't say you did though did I? 

Care to answer what other integral parts there are of a forensic audit other than a recount?

And for the record, I'm not surprised at the recount result.

Numbers are numbers indeed.

Here you go, pretty much all you need to know about the fiasco ( sorry, forensic) audit:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/arizona-republicans-release-findings-widely-panned-election-audit-2021-09-24/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I'm not on that one. I would be in between 2 and 3.

Which of the Apes is you?

In one day, pretty much all of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fann said she had passed along the review's findings to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who said his election integrity unit would look at the evidence.

 

Very interesting. If there was nothing to worry about, why pass on the review findings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 7HAR1980 said:

Fann said she had passed along the review's findings to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who said his election integrity unit would look at the evidence.

 

Very interesting. If there was nothing to worry about, why pass on the review findings?

Wouldn't it be more suspicious if they were not passing on the reviews findings?

Like the current UK gov. have done on their recent investigations into islamaphonia?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 7HAR1980 said:

Fann said she had passed along the review's findings to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who said his election integrity unit would look at the evidence.

 

Very interesting. If there was nothing to worry about, why pass on the review findings?

If you had bothered to read the article I linked (instead of copping out) you would have read about a number of serious botch-ups in the audit, and frankly weird experiments etc based on absurd conspiracy theory nonsense. As for Fann passing on the audit to an election integrity unit, why on earth do you consider that anything other than the obvious thing to do? 

Care to put your money where your mouth in and accept a £100 bet (to go to CSF) that nothing will happen in response to the audit, because they can find no evidence of any level of significant fraud?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, horsefly said:

If you had bothered to read the article I linked (instead of copping out) you would have read about a number of serious botch-ups in the audit, and frankly weird experiments etc based on absurd conspiracy theory nonsense. As for Fann passing on the audit to an election integrity unit, why on earth do you consider that anything other than the obvious thing to do? 

Care to put your money where your mouth in and accept a £100 bet (to go to CSF) that nothing will happen in response to the audit, because they can find no evidence of any level of significant fraud?

Again, another cop out. 

Answer the original question please.

If a recount is an integral part (of which there are many parts) of a forensic audit, what in your expertise are the other integral parts?

I'd rather hear it from the Horses-fly mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

Wouldn't it be more suspicious if they were not passing on the reviews findings?

Like the current UK gov. have done on their recent investigations into islamaphonia?

Not at all. Should it not mean 'nothing to see here'? 

We may need to see where the AZ AG takes it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...