Dominion Sues Rudy Giuliani For $1.3 Billion Over False Statements About Its Voting Systems
from the enjoy-your-self-inflicted-shitshow,-Rudy dept
During the runup to the presidential election, through the election, past the election, past the Electoral College vote, past the states’ certification of votes, multiple recounts and investigations, all the way up until VP Mike Pence was due to certify the vote, Donald Trump and his squad of sycophants claimed — without evidence — the election was fraudulent.
These claims — buttressed by public statements, heated tweets, and multiple baseless lawsuits — lit a fuse that triggered a January 6th explosion when Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building in a futile attempt to overturn the results of the presidential election.
Roughly a week after the insurrection, Dominion Voting Systems — accused of being a tool of the corrupt Venezuelan government — sued one of the more batshit extensions of Trump’s legal army, Sidney Powell. The defamation suit accused Powell of lying about pretty much everything related to Dominion.
Unfortunately for Dominion, it is a public figure so it’s going to have to prove deliberately false statements were made by people who knew the claims were false when they made them. Powell might be able to walk away from this suit, despite all of her false statements. Some were made in court which makes those claims immune from lawsuits. But others were made in public and those might end up costing her some money. Truth is the absolute defense to immunity but being a living, breathing caricature who embraces every galaxy brain conspiracy theory that floats by in the internet flotsam is also a defense. And that defense is “no one takes me seriously so it’s unlikely any reasonable people took my wild-ass lying claims about Dominion seriously either.” If Alex Jones can use it, so can Sidney Powell.
Dominion’s next target is Rudy Giuliani, someone who echoed a bunch of Powell’s wild claims and continued to do so as the Trump campaign (and other pro-Trumpers) lost lawsuit after lawsuit attempting to overturn election results.
Giuliani’s escapades as Trump’s legal rep have made it possible for him to make the same claim in his defense: that he’s so devoid of credibility no reasonable person would take his claims seriously. But Dominion’s lawsuit [PDF] makes a good case for a finding of actual malice by pointing out certain actions taken (or not taken) by Giuliani that strongly suggest he knew his public anti-Dominion statements were false.
The opening paragraph spells it out succinctly:
During a court hearing contesting the results of the 2020 election in Pennsylvania, Rudy Giuliani admitted that the Trump Campaign “doesn’t plead fraud” and that “this is not a fraud case.” Although he was unwilling to make false election fraud claims about Dominion and its voting machines in a court of law because he knew those allegations were false, he and his allies manufactured and disseminated the “Big Lie,” which foreseeably went viral and deceived millions of people into believing that Dominion has stolen their votes and fixed the election.
The lawsuit runs 107 pages, but that’s the crux of it. Giuliani made a lot of false public statements about Dominion, but he refused to make those claims in court. When lawsuits were filed, Giuliani wasn’t about to turn his press conference ravings into sworn statements. That’s a pretty solid indicator Giuliani had his doubts about some of the things he was saying publicly about Dominion. But it didn’t stop him from saying these things publicly. It didn’t stop him from making an alleged $20,000/day as Trump’s legal rep. And it didn’t stop him from shilling products on his podcasts and YouTube videos, where he repeated his false claims.
And there’s a strong argument for damages. Almost anything Trump, Giuliani, and other pro-Trump litigators said about stolen elections and Dominion’s involvement went viral. Dominion’s reputation has certainly been harmed. There’s a whole subset of Americans out there who fervently believe Dominion voting machines run on software developed by a company allegedly run by deceased dictator Hugo Chavez — software apparently created solely for the purpose of stealing votes and elections. No part of this allegation is true and Dominion uses no software created by this company. But thousands — if not millions — of people still believe this, even though no evidence has surfaced to back these claims.
And, despite this lack of evidence, Giuliani has refused to retract any of his false claims. If Dominion can surmount the “actual malice” bar in this case, the former New York mayor (and current MAGA madman) could be out of a whole lot of his $20k/day money. Dominion is asking for $1.3 billion in damages. It will certainly not be awarded this amount even if it wins, but the damages will still be sizable and it may be able to recover its legal fees on top of it.
This isn’t a slam dunk case but it’s still going to be very difficult for Giuliani to get this one dismissed. A man who beclowned himself for Trump and his base is going to have a hard time talking himself out of this one.
Filed Under: actual malice, defamation, rudy giuliani, sidney powell
Companies: dominion, dominion voting systems
Comments on “Dominion Sues Rudy Giuliani For $1.3 Billion Over False Statements About Its Voting Systems”
Bring the hammer down
If he truly believed that what he was saying out of court where there wasn’t a threat of perjury hanging over his head was true he would have had no problem repeating them in court where perjury charges were a very real possibility. That he didn’t and in fact changed his tune from claiming fraud to flat out stating that he was not arguing fraud would seem to make a solid case that he knew he was lying.
It would be one thing if he just bought into his own bullshit as that just leaves him gullible and stupid, but when he takes actions like that to cover his own ass it’s pretty obvious that he knew he was full of shit and as such he absolutely deserves to pay the price for his lies, whether that be disbarment, hefty fines or ideally both.
Rudy might have been too incompetent to plead it in court
IANAL, but from following some actual lawyers on Twitter I got the impression that Rudy might actually believe what he was saying about fraud, but that he was so incompetent in his filings that he never got the chance to argue fraud in court.
First off, in the case that Rudy actually argued before a judge, the case was being handled by another law firm but was handed over to Rudy shortly before the case was filed. Rudy claimed that do to "miscommunications" with the previous law firm that the firm erroneously removed the claims of fraud in the first amended complaint. Rudy tried to file a second amended complaint with the fraud claims added back in, but wasn’t allowed. While all this might have just been an excuse by Rudy as to why he wasn’t arguing fraud cases in court, it might have actually been something resembling miscommunication, in that it never occured to the previous law firm that Rudy would want to argue fraud before the court and that it never occurred to Rudy that the previous law firm would remove the claims of fraud. And because there was nothing about fraud in the first amended complaint, Rudy had to say "this isn’t about fraud" when asked about the lawsuit, even if he had wanted it to be about fraud.
The second potential screw up would be the appeal that Rudy et al filed. The appeal argued that they should have been allowed to file a second amended complaint, but in the text of the appeal they didn’t mention anything about fraud in the second amended complaint. However, in follow-up communications to the appeals court they asked to be allowed to make oral arguments about fraud which weren’t in the text of the appeal; they were denied. This might have been calculated on Rudy’s part, so that he would be able to claim that the appeals court didn’t allow him to argue about fraud, but it’s also consistent with Rudy being so incompetent that he just forgot to put the fraud claims in the text of the appeal, and then desperately tried to sneak the fraud claims back in via oral arguments.
Re: Rudy might have been too incompetent to plead it in court
That’s a good reason for lawyers to save their arguments for court and not hold press conferences. Giuliani didn’t have to make any public comments, but he chose to do so and do so in a flamboyant fashion. He should be disbarred.
Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue here.
Dominion Systems is owned by a reasonably neutral party, provides voting machines that are certified, and produce a paper trail that is easy to verify and audit.
So if you want to commit election fraud, your best bet is to spread the word that the systems are prone to fraud and should be replaced by voting machines from vendors that have a track record donating to the Republican Party, that don’t have a paper trail, and that have had numerous occurences in past elections where the software was exchanged after certification.
Which Republican Secretary of State can dare to rely on Dominion Systems for the next election now? They’ll all be called traitors. Like those Republicans who are considered traitors for ceding an election to a Democrat or saying that trying to overthrow an election for the sake of a Republican loser is unpatriotic.
It doesn’t matter that the facts say something else. The facts have stopped mattering long ago. I mean, the Bush administration was somewhat ashamed of the Weapons of Mass Destruction thing becoming a mythical beast. That was kind of a big thing then. But if Trump has taught the Republican Party anything it is that facts don’t matter as long as you continue spewing lies at a speed that it becomes boring to check them.
And so yes, Dominion Systems is essentially out of business in any state run by Republicans (Georgia’s admirably upright election officials notwithstanding). And yes, that causes very large damages, and the serial lies of Giuliani have played a significant part in causing those damages.
Re: Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue here.
"Dominion Systems is owned by a reasonably neutral party, provides voting machines that are certified, and produce a paper trail that is easy to verify and audit."
I would go a step further and require all voting machines to only have open source software that can be audited if there are some shenanigans.
Re: Re: Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue here.
Open Source software is nothing you can see, it can have bugs and hidden code, and there is also the Ken Thompson worm technique. A paper trail is a paper trail unless we are talking about shenanigans like magic ink.
Of course, once you routinely audit the results with hand recounts, the advantages compared to paper ballots become less. As opposed to hand-filled paper ballots, however, there is no puzzling about figuring out what the voter intended. And the unofficial results on election night can come in a lot faster.
Is that worth the trouble? Judgment call. Here in Germany, nothing but paper ballots have ever been used. Helps a lot against trust issues unless you involve serially lying propaganda apparatus. Paper ballots did not really matter in the U.S.: from an election security standpoint, it may have been the most secure and tamper-proof election in the U.S. ever. It doesn’t help against serially lying bad losers.
Re: Re: Re: Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue he
"Open Source software is nothing you can see"
Erm, what?
However you want to spin it, it’s definitely better than proprietary code which is potentially only audited by a handful of people who can be just as easily misled (if not more so) by any of the things you might be talking about.
"Is that worth the trouble?"
I agree that the step required to make electronic voting as visibly secure as paper voting, but if it’s on the table then I’d suggest that those steps to secure them are certainly worth the effort.
Re: Re: Re:2 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issu
"Erm, what?"
I think they use that new fangled invisible ink when writing their open sauce.
Re: Re: Re:3 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the
Let’s see an election official certify that a voting machine is running a particular version of Open Source software that they have personally verified to not lend itself to tampering.
Somehow certifying a ballot box seems like less of a challenge to verify for proper operation for a layman.
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
"Open Source software is nothing you can see"
This was the claim. How is this software not visible?
Open Source means that one is allowed to view the source code as opposed to Closed Source where it is a trade secret or something.
Many times open source code is held online at places like github. You can download the software, validate checksum, review what the code does. You can do this because it is Open Source.
But somehow you can see it?
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
"for a layman"
Why would securing an election depend on the opinions of people with no expertise the the area? Wouldn’t it be better in either case for actual experts in the subject to be involved?
If so, why would you prefer a proprietary software owned by a single company and not visible to most experts in the field over open source that can be examined by every expert?
I get why you would prefer paper ballots to digital, but if the latter is on the table then clearly OSS is better and your claim that it’s not visible compared to the alternatives is utter nonsense.
Re: Re: Re:5 Personally, I think election fraud _
Because you don’t want the experts defraud the laymen and thus create an oligarchy instead of a democracy. When anyone who has trust issues can volunteer for election work and check for themselves that votes are properly accounted for, that lends credibility to elections.
Blackboxes whose verification depends on knowledge and circumstances and control not accessible to the layman interfere with that.
Re: Re: Re:6 Personally, I think election fra
"Blackboxes whose verification depends on knowledge and circumstances and control not accessible to the layman interfere with that."
Open source software is the opposite of a black box. Why do you keep pretending otherwise?
Again, I agree that paper trails and independent auditing is important, I’m just not sure why you pretend this can’t happen with an electronic system.
Re: Re: Re:6 Personally, I think election fra
Are you familiar with the people and methods used to validate election machinery? I guess you do not trust them, so why not dl the source yourself and review it – would you know what you are looking at and how to find potential issues? Have you ever tested software?
Re: Re: Re:2 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issu
You simply cannot do it. Paper ballots themselves are countable. Electronics, on the other hand, require that you trust the vendor to load the same firmware you thought was built, and you also trust the authors to produce bug-free code.
Re: Re: Re:3 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the
That’s why you have a paper trail for validation of machine counting.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue here.
Well there might be a motive for them not to be neutral given their history.
They had next to no market share until the DOJ during Obama’s administration practically handed them assets from their competitors in the name of competition and then essentially gave them some business. Shortly after which Dominion acquired Diebold and Smartmatic which is where all the accusations of corrupt software is coming from.
Re: Re: Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue here.
Got sources? I am interested and would like to know more.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re: Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issue he
Here’s a good starter.
https://defyccc.com/shocking-history-of-dominion-voting/
Re: Re: Re:2 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issu
This is source parrots the same claims that Trump’s lawyers refused to make in court. Since Trump’s lawyers did not dare actually make those claims in court, I cannot trust said claims, and cannot trust a source that parrots said claims.
Do you have a source that talks about the history of Dominion Voting Systems using facts instead of unsubstantiated claims?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the
No. You’ll have to find your own facts if the real ones aren’t sufficient for you.
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
Hahahahaha … this is classic
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
Ah yes, the real facts, like checks sidebar "Updates on the Democrat Insurrection of Jan 6", "Bolshevik Coups of Jan 6 – from Lenin to Pelosi", and "General Masking is Useless".
Yep, this is clearly an objective, unbiased, and not-at-all-batshit-fucking-crazy source you have provided.
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
Those are unsubstantiated innuendo, not facts.
"In 2010, the Obama administration confiscated electronic voting systems assets (software, intellectual property, manufacturing tools, customer base, etc.) from two established American companies, and gave them to Dominion. At the same time, Dominion got some employees and assets from a foreign EVS company, tied to Hugo Chavez."
Which employees? Which assets?
Playing six degrees of separation between companies, where you don’t even specify the intermediate companies, is not evidence.
Re: Re: Re:5 Personally, I think election fraud _
He’s repeating weeks old QAnon crap that’s already been widely debunked.
"Playing six degrees of separation between companies, where you don’t even specify the intermediate companies, is not evidence."
If these guys had evidence, Rudy would have presented it to a court at a time where it made a difference to the election. Instead, he’s not being paid for time served by the orange lord who already disowned him, and being sued for $1.3 billion by the people he defamed.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the
To elaborate on my previous comment since apparently it can’t be edited, what I mean is I’m not sure what sites meet your level of excellence. That page links out to quite a few of the sources they use when compiling the article.
Which facts are you unable to verify from a "reliable" source?
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
"I’m not sure what sites meet your level of excellence"
You may notice that the site is not what TFG was questioning, he was questioning whether a repetition of the claims that Trump tried to make in court (but failed to present any actual evidence for) had any value. It doesn’t matter who’s writing the article, if the claim is "well, Trump lost 60 courts cases, but honestly believe us" isn’t a good argument no matter who presents it, unless they are publishing the evidence that Trump’s lawyers failed to present.
Re: Re: Re:5 Personally, I think election fraud _
I’m questioning it. It doesn’t take more than five seconds to see, and thirty seconds to confirm, that it’s a fringe-bloody-lunatic conspiracy theorist site, and I wouldn’t trust it if it told me it was going to be sunny and hot outside. And I live in Phoenix.
Re: Re: Re:2 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the issu
When the top search result for defyccc is:
One has to question why you are treating a fiction site as a real news and information site.
Re: Re: Re:3 Personally, I think election fraud _is_ the
Why would these guys stick to factual sites? That would sort of undermine their entire arguments..
Re: Re: Re:4 Personally, I think election fraud _is_
You can only pick one.
Re: Re: Re:5 Personally, I think election fraud _
Now you are just being hurtful. Alternative facts have feelings too.
Beware and be wary
The 6th January
Republicans’ treasonous plot
I know of no reason
That the GOP’s treason
Should ever
Be
Forgot
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
It's just Tech
As a tech-oriented site, I find it astounding you would ignore (or worse, cover up) the hundreds of tech and data people who have addressed definitively the criminal anomalies of Dominion.
Simply astonishing that your hatred of Giuliani would blind you to the plain facts of data, math, code, illegal connection to the internet. All of that evidence, and you still claim Rudy’s claims are false?
How do you hold your head up?
Re: It's just Tech
"All of that evidence" of which none makes it to court… Only to wild social media posts damaging a company’s reputation. Which is what the suit is about.
Re: It's just Tech
" I find it astounding you would ignore (or worse, cover up) the hundreds of tech and data people who have addressed definitively the criminal anomalies of Dominion."
Can you provide some examples? I can’t think of any except that lunatic woman that Rudy brought up as a witness and ended up being a hilarious comedy skit, and a guy who was claiming he found some things in their user manuals that might have led to a possible hack (but no evidence of one happening).
Could you point me to something with any substance or credibility?
Re: It's just Tech
I find it astounding that the adolescent denial of reality has taken over the entire conservative community. The adults in the room are getting tired of the juvenile bullshit.
Re: Re: It's just Tech
You don’t get what is happening. It’s not that the adolescent denial of reality has taken over the Republican Party ("conservative community" would refer to something based on values which is clearly not the case here). It’s that the denying adolescents have taken over the Republican Party in exchange for a vote boost.
The adults in the room are not so much getting tired of the juvenile bullshit as they are starting to get scared silly by them but don’t know how they can get rid of the spectres they called.
Just watch McConnell labor on distancing the party or at least himself from the most batshit crazy things that previously he had avoided to call out. It would be pitiable if it wasn’t so very much deserved. It’s also really dangerous for democracy. A classic case of "Die ich rief, die Geister, werd ich nun nicht los."
Re: Re: Re: It's just Tech
"You don’t get what is happening."
You are not wrong.
" in exchange for a vote boost."
I don’t understand what one thinks they will get in return for their "loyalty", all I see is them getting tossed under the buss. I must be missing something here, secret payments, promises of utopia … what?
"Just watch McConnell"
Haha, he is now calling out the Qanon from GA but it is just a ruse to stop the exodus of campaign contribution.
Re: Re: Re: It's just Tech
There is no new thing under the sun.
For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind'' [Hosea 8:7]. It sounded better then, compared tothey have raised up the Tea Party, and are now soaked in tannins”.Re: It's just Tech
Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. The latter is in short supply it seems.
Se above, Rudy didn’t produce one bit of evidence while his mouth was busy spewing bullshit. And it’s not hatred, it’s disdain for a shill.
I don’t know about you, but I have a spine.
Re: It's just Tech
But not just taking some rando fuckwits’ on the Internet (such as you) by their words.
Re:
Rudy Giuliani didn’t try to pass off his lies as the truth in a court of law. You have nothing more credible to offer than he does.
Re: Re: Re:
"Rudy Giuliani didn’t try to pass off his lies as the truth in a court of law"
More to the point – Rudy talked up in front of the cameras about how he had mountains of evidence of election fraud, but when he was in a court faced with an actual judge, he started going "well, we’re not alleging fraud per se…"
I’m willing to change my mind in the face of actual evidence, but given that Rudy and his team refused to supply it to a court at the point when it could actually have prevented Biden from being sworn in, I’m not going to hold my breath for the idea that one of our regular muppets has some actual proof.
Re: It's just Tech
Hundreds? Then why can’t you name one?
All of that evidence, all those plain facts, and you can’t name one single example?
Re: It's just Tech
I am compelled to add to this discussion. I saw no tech people in court rooms. I saw tech people on cable news and in performative hearings. Those "tech people" were often unable to accurately describe the voting systems they were discussing, the phrase USB cards which came up several times being my go to example. They often conflated voting systems and counting systems, with no real clarity as to which they were referring which is a major mistake with dominion systems as these are fully separate, air gapped components which have different software and hardware. They did not, generally, appear to have the necessary technical literacy to be an election IT security expert, as opposed to the much wider pool of physical election security experts.
Moreover, dominion is a good e-voting system that produces paper ballots, the type of e-voting system I have long advocated for. This allowed a hand-recount of ballots in Georgia proving that counting systems did not get "overwhelmed" and flip trump votes to Biden, nor did workers in Georgia double or triple count Biden ballots. Nor could hackers have influenced the hand recount, which means we need to see more than a general claim of fraud, we need specifics of a system that was hacked to take such claims seriously. At least one fraud claim boiled down to "I wasn’t watching and a stack of rejected ballots was moved and so I think someone counted ineligible votes." Its all speculation. And you think with all the scrutiny we’d have more than speculation.
There is no data or math. Not that a lawyer was willing to submit to a court.
Re: It's just Tech
If by “addressed” you mean “disproved”, then yes, hundreds of tech and data people have addressed the alleged “anomolies”. That is, the allegations have been shown to be false. I tend to ignore claims that have been disproven.
You have cause and effect backwards. I hate Giuliani because he makes up stuff like this. Also, those “plain facts” that I’ve seen that you’re talking about have all been either disproven, don’t prove anything, are not actually anomalous, or are both difficult to believe and unsupported by any actual evidence.
But they were taken seriously
I think the best counter to this is that on January 6th people did take what they had been saying very seriously, to very serious consequences. While the attack on the capitol does not directly harm Dominion, it does show that some segment of the public does believe what was said by the Trump org including Powell and Giuliani.
While I do not believe the conspiracy trump was pushing out, voting machines are certainly not secure. Just look into Defcon’s “Voting village” that they’ve been running for several years now. While the claims in this post are certainly fantastical, there are many others that hold credibility.
Re: Re:
While the claims in this post are certainly fantastical, there are many others that hold credibility.
Let’s not equate "credibility" with "it must’ve happened."
I mean, I can say I’m going to crash my car into yours.
And it certainly is a possibility, in that I’m capable of driving one vehicle into another.
But saying it, and citing the possibility of it doesn’t mean jack shit as far as it actually happening.
Call me when one of trump’s wingnuts grows a set of balls and puts all the ‘evidence’ in a document under penalty of perjury. That’s when we should all give something of a fuck.
Re: Re:
"While I do not believe the conspiracy trump was pushing out, voting machines are certainly not secure"
There are some doubts, but there has been no credible evidence that they were compromised to a degree necessary to change the results of the last election. Indeed, the main complaints have been over mail in ballots, which have nothing to do with machines, which have been manually recounted several times and been found to be accurate.
"there are many others that hold credibility"
Such as?
Complaints about Cancel Culture coming from those who wish to cancel the 2020 election results is quite humorous.
These same folk would like to cancel a few laws and court precedence also. But it is those libtards who are canceling all of our great culture, all that great bigotry and hatred is special to them I guess. Better not let those advertisers know how you feel about the shows their products are appearing upon.
Re: Re:
They don’t want to cancel them but correct them. Indeed one of the major complaints is that they only want to have legal votes be counted, where "illegal" is defined as a manner of voting used to a higher degree by Democrats.
Georgia’s legislature has now introduced a number of restrictions for the next election to address the "mistrust" (also known as "displeasure") in the results. Because the legitimacy is not in question, thanks to "traitorous" Republican election officials that have made sure that the results bear up to any scrutiny. So they are not addressing problems of "fraud" but of "distrust". Distrust that is entirely due to hucksters like Trump and Giuliani.
Re: Re: Re:
"Indeed one of the major complaints is that they only want to have legal votes be counted"
We can all agree on that. But, they have failed to provide evidence that illegal votes swayed the election to any degree. Indeed, the only verifiable cases of fraud that have been proven so far were people voting for Trump, and even if they had voted for Biden the numbers wouldn’t be anywhere near enough to challenge the result of the election.
That’s what’s so laughable here – everybody agrees that there needs to be fair and just elections. The 2020 election has been verified many times over to have been such a thing. Those complaining about it have provided no credible evidence that it has been anything but. Yet, they still attempted to overthrow the results.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It is playing games with words. In all cases of complaints, the difference between an actual "legal" vote and an "illegal" vote according to that Orwellian word usage is not that some voter has been shown to be unauthorized to vote, but rather that the voter may not have been made to jump through all the hoops put up for the sake of voter disenfranchisement.
Stuff like "we rigged the postal service so that votes cast in time (as proven by post stamp) were not received in time, and we insist that we reap the rewards for rigging the postal service".
Re: Re: Re:2
To put it more simply: Republicans want every legal vote counted, but they don’t want every legal voter to count.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
With ‘legal vote’ defined as ‘vote for a republican candidate’.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
"Stuff like "we rigged the postal service so that votes cast in time (as proven by post stamp) were not received in time, and we insist that we reap the rewards for rigging the postal service"."
Sadly, it’s not even that clever in many cases. Many of the complaints seem to be predicated on the fact that Trump appeared to be winning certain races, but when the mail in ballots were counted then Biden had a clear win. Which, they are choosing to interpret as people magically finding new votes after polls were closed, but in reality were down to Republican rules preventing mail in ballots from being counted until after the polls had closed.
Unless they can prove that ballots sent after the polls had closed were being counted, they’re literally arguing against the concept of linear time, and the rules they themselves made to stop people from counting the ballots when they were received before the polls closed.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
As it’s turning out, a good portion of these anti-American terrorist shitwits didn’t even bother voting in the election they hallucinate was rigged because they guy they didn’t cast votes for ended up losing.
Re: Re: Re:
Really, a lot of the distrust flows from the fact that the original intent of the founding fathers is no longer followed. The intent was that white male freeholders should vote. Now you have darker-complected people, women, and even people who do not own property voting.
Georgia, and surely several other states, are working to get back to the original intent. There may be some concern over whether this is a good thing.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
We should continue to follow the original intent of the founding fathers … uh huh
You like modern dentistry? How about some wooden dentures?
Do you ride your horse to work or do you take the wagon?
Make America agrarian again.
Maybe they should become Amish.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Poe’s law strikes again.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I walk. My office is in the City, and I live close enough that this generally works.
I am not sure that the founding fathers included anything in the U.S. Constitution about how I should get to work, however. They did, however, include provisions for allowing the franchise to white male property owners. This was indirect: A1S2 let the states set qualifications, which were generally so limited.
Re: Re:
"Complaints about Cancel Culture coming from those who wish to cancel the 2020 election results is quite humorous."
Based on recent evidence – people wanting to cancel the results of the election who had never actually voted themselves. You couldn’t make this stuff up…
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Uh huh...
Dominion’s going to lose this one.
Because Dominion, to prove that its stuff isn’t crooked, is going to HAVE to allow people to do a deep forensics dive into their machines.
And, just a FYI, in ONE county in Michigan, which USED Dominion voting machines…
4000 votes that should have gone to Trump went to Biden.
Re: Uh huh...
"Because Dominion, to prove that its stuff isn’t crooked, is going to HAVE to allow people to do a deep forensics dive into their machines."
Unlikely. They will probably state that Rudy et al’s claims were false, and ask the defendants to provide their evidence of wrongdoing. When that’s found to be non-existent, they will be fined for defamation. Dominion probably won’t have to open anything up unless the defendants find some evidence they refused to provide to a court before, in which case they would only "lose" if Rudy’s claims were found to be true. Which is extremely unlikely.
"And, just a FYI, in ONE county in Michigan, which USED Dominion voting machines…
4000 votes that should have gone to Trump went to Biden."
Weird, I’ve not heard of that one, and I’m sure that must have been something Rudy brought up in court if true, instead of being laughed out of 60 courtrooms.
Source?
Re: Uh huh...
Wait … Dominion has to prove they did not do something?
How?
Re: Re: Uh huh...
Burden of proof is somewhere in the long list of things these people don’t understand.
Bad managers?
US’s government use 100+ billion dollars every year for military and wars but can’t use few billion create public, open source, secure election system on common computer hardware. Corruption or bad management? Plus, many years, TechDirt have story about several security experts show vote count machine in US have security problems and US’s government never care?
Re: Bad managers?
Corruption or bad management?
Option 3: All of the above.