Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The US 2020 Presidential Election & Attempts To Overturn It

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    I was just thinking the same thing

    Fox got off so lightly. The settlement should've included an admission of wrongdoing but that would never have happened, for several reasons.
    I'm not across the details of the case but if Fox made similar claims about Smartmatic's voting machines to the ones they made about Dominion's (and I'm pretty sure they did) then Fox is almost certain to settle - and sign another large cheque in the process. Hopefully along with another admission that the main claims made in their reports were false.
    Last edited by Monash; 19 Apr 23,, 06:56.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post
    I wonder whats going to happen with Smartmatic's case now?
    I was just thinking the same thing

    Fox got off so lightly. The settlement should've included an admission of wrongdoing but that would never have happened, for several reasons.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Well, well well, who'd have thought it. Fox news has reached an 11th hour 'settlement' in the defamation suit brought against it by Dominion Voting systems. The settlement was worth 787 million of the 1.6 billion in the original statement of claim. Personally I would have liked to see Fox pay out more but its still a kick in the balls to Fox's (and Rupert's) bottom line. And of course for Dominion 787 million is still a good amount of change.

    In a statement released after the settlement was announced Fox stated that “we acknowledge” the court’s earlier ruling that certain claims that the network’s anchors made about Dominion were false. No doubt made through gritted teeth and with every senior executive and the Murdoch family trying to pretend the whole thing never happened!

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/...efamation-case

    I wonder whats going to happen with Smartmatic's case now?
    Last edited by Monash; 19 Apr 23,, 01:10.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Witness Testimony Helps Prosecutors Advance Trump Election Case
    Without fanfare, the Justice Department’s investigation into former President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election is approaching an important milestone.

    After nearly nine months of behind-the-scenes clashes, Trump’s lawyers have largely lost their battle to limit testimony from some of his closest aides to a federal grand jury. The decisions, in a string of related cases, represent an almost total failure by Trump to constrain the reach of the inquiry and have strengthened the position of Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing the investigation, as he builds an accounting of the former president’s efforts to retain power after his defeat at the polls.

    Having lost their challenges to grand jury subpoenas and largely failed to limit the scope of their testimony with assertions of executive and attorney-client privilege, a last group of aides is now being forced to answer questions.

    On Tuesday, it was Stephen Miller, an adviser and top speechwriter for Trump, who showed up in U.S. District Court in Washington and spent several hours in front of the grand jury. On Thursday, it was John Ratcliffe, the former director of national intelligence. The process could culminate near the end of this month with an appearance by former Vice President Mike Pence.

    While questions linger over pending appeals and potential efforts by some of the witnesses to delay things further by invoking the Fifth Amendment, the developments suggest that Smith is close to finishing the fact-finding phase of his work and is moving closer to a decision about seeking charges against Trump and others.

    There are no clear indications about when Smith might decide about charges in the case, but he faces pressure on several fronts to keep the process moving.

    The political season could be a consideration: The 2024 presidential race is heating up, with Trump still regarded as the front-runner for the Republican nomination, and the first debate of the GOP primary season has been scheduled for August.

    On the legal front, the looming decision by a district attorney in Georgia, Fani Willis, on whether to seek indictment of Trump on charges related to his efforts to overturn his election loss has placed added pressure on Smith, who must decide whether allowing another prosecutor to go first with similar charges could complicate any prosecution he pursues.

    “The speed of the Georgia state investigation increases the pressure on Jack Smith to move with alacrity and to get his witnesses before the federal grand jury now,” said John P. Fishwick Jr., a Barack Obama appointee who served as the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia from 2015 to 2017. “Once the state indictment comes down, it can really bog down the DOJ investigation.”

    Among those who have worked with him, Smith is seen as a diligent manager bent on collecting the information needed to make a decision while remaining cognizant of the time pressures and the highly partisan atmosphere in which he is operating.

    In his first and only public comments — a statement emailed to reporters shortly after his appointment in November — he vowed that the pace of his Trump investigations would “not pause or flag,” noting that he would “move the investigations forward expeditiously and thoroughly to whatever outcome the facts and the law dictate.”

    Smith is also overseeing the parallel investigation into Trump’s handling of classified information after leaving office and whether the former president obstructed government efforts to reclaim the materials.

    Attorney General Merrick Garland, who will ultimately make the decision on whether to indict Trump, has told associates that he will not overrule Smith’s judgment, whatever it turns out to be, unless he believes the special counsel has deviated from departmental standards and procedures.

    Garland, and his top deputy Lisa Monaco, have publicly projected an air of detachment from the case, but they have been following developments in the privilege fights that have been playing out in the federal courthouse that sits just a few blocks from their office. They have been receiving regular briefings from aides who are getting updates from members of Smith’s team, according to two people familiar with the situation.

    The legal battles over privilege began well before Smith was appointed to the special counsel post and have pitted two powerful forces against each other.

    In the course of the investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, federal prosecutors have subpoenaed an army of Trump’s former aides in an effort to have the grand jury hear as many firsthand accounts as possible of his behavior in the White House in the days leading up to the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

    Trump’s lawyers have countered by asserting that any adviser close to the former president should not have to answer certain questions in front of the grand jury because of attorney-client privilege, which protects communications between lawyers and those they represent, and executive privilege, which shields some communications between the president and members of his administration.

    Among the first people to engage in this debate were Marc Short and Greg Jacob, two of Pence’s top aides, who went into the grand jury in July and asserted privilege in response to certain questions, prompting prosecutors to file motions compelling their full testimony. Setting a pattern for the months that followed, Trump’s lawyers fought those motions but ultimately lost their case in front of Beryl Howell, then the chief federal judge in Washington, and subsequently in front of a federal appeals court.

    With the privilege waived, Short and Jacob testified for a second time in October. They were followed two months later by Pat Cipollone and Patrick Philbin, the two top lawyers in Trump’s White House, who went through the same process.

    The fight dragged on into this year as another round of aides — including Miller; Dan Scavino, a onetime deputy chief of staff; and Scavino’s boss, Mark Meadows, Trump’s final chief of staff — all tried, and failed, to assert forms of privileges. The last skirmish took place just a couple of weeks ago when a new chief judge, James E. Boasberg, turned down efforts to limit Pence’s testimony.

    While getting these witnesses in front of the grand jury has been challenging and time consuming, the accounts they have given — or will eventually give — are only a fraction of the total body of evidence that Smith and his predecessors have gathered.

    Well before Smith arrived, another prosecutor, Thomas Windom, obtained grand jury testimony from pro-Trump figures like Ali Alexander, who organized several prominent “Stop the Steal” events, and from a wide array of state officials involved in a plan to create fake slates of pro-Trump electors in swing states that were actually won by President Joe Biden.

    Windom, who now works with Smith, also oversaw the seizure of phones from lawyers close to Trump, including John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark and Boris Epshteyn. Mike Roman, a campaign strategist who was the director of Election Day operations for the Trump campaign in 2020, also had his phone seized under Windom’s watch.

    Other prosecutors who now work with the special counsel began an inquiry before Smith arrived into Save America PAC, a fundraising operation that Trump created after his loss in the election. As part of that investigation, dozens of subpoenas have been issued to companies that have received money from the political action committee, including some law firms.
    _____

    So nice to have quiet professionalism return to the DoJ

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Trump Is Forever
    Republicans have talked themselves into believing that 2024 is absolutely, positively, the last time they’ll have to deal with Donald Trump. Yesterday Benjy Sarlin brought the room down by arguing that even if Trump loses in 2024, he might run again in 2028, actuarial tables be damned.

    Is that possible? Absolutely. If Trump loses in 2024, he could easily mount another campaign—though this is as much an indictment of Don Jr. as a plausible heir as anything else.

    But let me take this a step further.

    During the Republican primaries, one of the arguments that Good Republicans will deploy against Trump as a way of passively challenging him will be to say something along the lines of, “Trump is great! But if Trump is the nominee, we can only get four years, because he couldn’t run for reelection in 2028. We need a Republican nominee who can give us eight years.”

    Well I come to you from the future and I’m here to tell you that Donald Trump will respond with the following:
    -
    A lot of people are saying that, actually, I could run again. I was treated so unfairly during my first term—the Russia hoax, the witch hunt, the lovers—more unfairly than any president in history. [sniffs] And so I should get a third term. Let me tell you that we’re looking into it and we’ll have a statement very soon. It’ll be a strong statement. And I think a lot of you are going to be very happy with it.

    In response, his Republican challengers will gape and sputter and twist their toes in the dirt. But they won’t say that a third term is impossible. Elite Republicans in elected office will decline to comment. And the various precincts of Conservatism Inc. will either ignore this claim, coyly play along with it, or roll their eyes and say, “Well of course this is nonsense so it doesn’t matter. Trump just says stuff.”


    Why am I certain that this future is coming down the pike?

    Because Trump already did it in 2020.

    Look, there was a lot going on in 2020. Impeachment. A pandemic. Massive unemployment. Hundreds of thousands of Americans dying. A presidential campaign. So much to keep track of.

    So you probably don’t remember this moment at a rally in Wisconsin in August of 2020:
    -
    “We are going to win four more years,” Trump said at a rally in Oshkosh, Wisconsin on Monday. “And then after that, we’ll go for another four years because they spied on my campaign. We should get a redo of four years.”

    The crowd went wild. Republican voters loved it. And this idea wasn’t a one-off bit of improv. It was a staple. In September at a Nevada rally he said,
    -
    And 52 days from now we're going to win Nevada, and we're going to win four more years in the White House. And then after that, we'll negotiate, right? Because we're probably — based on the way we were treated — we are probably entitled to another four after that.

    Do you remember what Republican elected officials and people in conservative media said about the frequent assertion by their candidate that he would flout the Constitution in pursuit of a third presidential term?

    Let’s go to the tape:


    All of this has happened before. All of this will happen again.

    So get ready for the Trump Gets a Third Term argument. It’s coming.
    ____________

    It's always time to recite the Trumper's Prayer. You know the one.

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    Remember, it's not news; it's entertainment !

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Hear Trump Officials Tell Fox Their Election Fraud Claims Were Bogus



    The Kraken has been released.

    On Wednesday night, MSNBC aired explosive audio recordings of former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and Trump campaign officials telling Fox News after the 2020 election that there was no evidence Dominion voting machines flipped votes for President Joe Biden.

    The existence of the tapes, recorded by former Fox News producer Abby Grossberg, was first revealed in an amended legal complaint by Grossberg earlier this week. Grossberg is suing Fox News for harassment and discrimination, accusing the network’s lawyers of coercing her to falsely testify in the Dominion defamation case.

    In her Tuesday filing, Grossberg claimed that Fox News failed to disclose evidence to Dominion of multiple recordings she made of Giuliani, former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, and “high-ranking” Trump campaign officials admitting they had no proof to back their election fraud claims. She recorded the conversations in November and December 2020 during her time as the senior booking producer of Fox host Maria Bartiromo, who helped promote Team Trump’s voting machine conspiracies.

    During a pre-trial hearing on Wednesday, the judge in the Dominion case reprimanded Fox News for withholding key evidence in discovery after Dominion lawyers aired some of the recordings in court. Besides sanctioning the network, the judge said he was likely to appoint a “special master” to investigate the matter and whether Fox made “untrue or negligent” claims about Rupert Murdoch’s role at the network.

    During Wednesday night’s broadcast of MSNBC’s Alex Wagner Tonight, host Alex Wagner revealed that her program had obtained copies of Grossberg’s recordings from the ex-Fox producer’s legal team.

    In the first tape aired by Wagner, Giuliani was fairly upfront that he had no actual proof that there was anything wrong with Dominion’s voting machines or software. Preparing for an interview with Bartiromo just days after the presidential election, the ex-New York City mayor said off-air that he could tell the pro-Trump anchor “exactly” what the Trump team had in terms of evidence.

    Asked about the “Dominion software,” however, Giuliani stated that was a “little harder” before asserting that there were some races in Michigan “being analyzed right now” over claims they had double-counted votes. “Now, whether that applies for the whole state or not, I can’t tell you yet,” he added.

    Bartiromo then wondered about a conspiracy theory that Nancy Pelosi had any ownership interest in the voting software firm, prompting Giuliani to reply: “I’ve read that. I can’t prove that.”

    In another conversation between a Fox News producer, Bartiromo and Trump campaign officials weeks later, an official asked to go off the record before admitting that there didn’t appear to be anything awry with voting software in Georgia.

    “I think they have looked at the machines. When the secretary of state did its audit, there was a lot, I think a fair bit of looking at the machines,” the campaign official said. “The audit came in pretty darn close to what the machine count was with the receipts. So, I don’t know the outcome of those, but our understanding—again, this is from the secretary of state’s office—was that there weren’t any physical issues with machines on those inspections.”

    Later in that same conversation, which took place on Dec. 5, 2020, the Trump adviser also raised the date of January 6 as the “backstop” for potentially overturning the election. This was also two weeks before former President Donald Trump first publicly urged his supporters to protest in Washington, saying “it will be wild.”

    “We have seen so much reporting, whether it be December 8 or December 14, and we’ve seen virtually zero pickup of the January 6 date,” the official said, adding that people with “normal lives” probably weren’t aware of the importance of that date in certifying presidential elections.

    “That’s the whole reason why I wanted to chat with you two just to understand where the real backstops are here,” he continued. “And if both sets of electors are set up, that would be the moment when the vice president—who’s the president of the Senate—would have to decide which slate of electors to go with.”

    The back-and-forth between Bartiromo and the Trump adviser on the relevance of January 6 weeks ahead of the Capitol riots will probably not be admitted into the Dominion case. The judge ruled on Tuesday that lawyers for the voting software company may not mention the Jan. 6 attacks during the trial.

    In its $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit, Dominion accuses Fox News of knowingly peddling election fraud lies about the company in an effort to boost sagging ratings after MAGA viewers bolted following the network’s early Arizona call for Biden, a charge the conservative cable giant vehemently denies.

    Additionally, Fox has pushed back on allegations that it withheld evidence from Dominion or mischaracterized Murdoch’s current relationship with the network.

    “As counsel explained to the Court, FOX produced the supplemental information from Ms. Grossberg when we first learned it,” a network spokesperson said, adding in a separate statement: “Rupert Murdoch has been listed as executive chairman of FOX News in our SEC filings for several years and this filing was referenced by Dominion’s own attorney during his deposition.”
    ________

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post
    Not a good look for Fox News. The whole 'we were only reporting the story, not suggesting that the narrative being presented was true' defense. Suddenly that narrative turns out to be profit driven and any 'facts' that impede making that profit are to be deliberately excluded.
    Oh don't worry, these were just cherry-picked quotes without context. Certainly there aren't plenty more instances of Fox holding their audience in utter contempt. No sir, not at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Not a good look for Fox News. The whole 'we were only reporting the story, not suggesting that the narrative being presented was true' defense. Suddenly that narrative turns out to be profit driven and any 'facts' that impede making that profit are to be deliberately excluded.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Fox News CEO said correspondent’s fact-check of Trump’s election lies was ‘bad for business,’ new emails show



    Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott sounded the alarm inside the company about the financial fallout that the right-wing network would suffer if it continued fact-checking then-President Donald Trump’s lies after the 2020 election, according to messages that became public Wednesday.

    In one instance, Scott emailed Meade Cooper, executive vice president of prime time programming, and laced into correspondent Eric Shawn for fact-checking Trump.

    “This has to stop now,” Scott said in a December 2, 2020, message.

    “This is bad for business and there is a lack of understanding what is happening in these shows,” Scott added. “The audience is furious and we are just feeding them material. Bad for business.”

    The email to Cooper was revealed as part of Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News. Like several documents made public Wednesday, the email had previously been redacted in earlier court filings. The new emails were included in a presentation that Dominion showed at a hearing last week in Wilmington, Delaware. The voting technology company publicly released the full slideshow Wednesday, per a court order. Fox News, which denies any wrongdoing, has accused Dominion of cherry-picking emails to present a self-serving narrative about what the right-wing network did after the 2020 election.

    “These documents once again demonstrate Dominion’s continued reliance on cherry-picked quotes without context to generate headlines in order to distract from the facts of this case,” a Fox spokesperson said in a statement. “The foundational right to a free press is at stake and we will continue to fiercely advocate for the First Amendment in protecting the role of news organizations to cover the news.”

    In another email written by Scott, zinging host Dana Perino for her “dismissive tone” in November 2020 after the presidential contest, the Fox News chief disclosed that the company had “lost 25k subs from FOX NATION,” its streaming service.



    In earlier court filings, the data about the Fox Nation subscriptions had been redacted.

    The messages underscore the panic that gripped Fox News in the wake of the 2020 election when its viewers rebelled against the channel for accurately calling the election for President Joe Biden.

    Other newly released emails showed network producers discussing how putting Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell on the air inflated ratings. At the time, Powell, Giuliani and host Lou Dobbs were promoting debunked conspiracy theories that Dominion had rigged the 2020 election by flipping millions of votes.





    “Any day with Rudy and Sidney is guaranteed gold!” the Dobbs producer wrote. In another email, another Dobbs producer wrote, “to keep this alive, we really need Rudy or Sidney.”

    The full email chains are not publicly available.
    _________

    Someone remind me again...Who doesn't trust fact-checkers, and why?

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    I always get them confused with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles....same amount of credibility I'd say
    Hey the Teen Turtles kicked ass! The Cyber Ninja's on the other hand couldn't find their own asses let alone kick someone else's.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post
    Don't forget the 'cyber ninja's'.
    I always get them confused with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles....same amount of credibility I'd say

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Don't forget the 'cyber ninja's'.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Trump’s own research showed that voter fraud did not cost him election – report
    Report commissioned by Trump campaign debunked former president’s claims that ballots came from dead voters

    The Donald Trump election campaign’s efforts to show that thousands of ballots were cast in the name of dead people in the pivotal state of Georgia during the 2020 election resulted in a research report that in fact contradicted Trump’s claims that widespread election fraud cost him the presidency, according to a report on Friday.

    Joe Biden’s victory in Georgia in 2020 was key and the Trump team’s own information went against Trump’s subsequent denial of the legitimate win by his opponent, according to the Washington Post.

    Prosecutors investigating Trump’s role in the insurrection at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 by his supporters attempting to overturn the certification by Congress of Biden’s victory obtained the campaign research, the Washington Post reported.

    Trump’s insistence that thousands of ballots came from dead people became especially infamous following revelations that he had urged the Georgia secretary of state, Republican Brad Raffensperger, to “find” enough votes so he would win, during a 2 January 2021 call. The Trump-commissioned study refuting this very claim “was dated one day prior” to this call, per the Post.

    “Dead people”, Trump nevertheless remarked during the call. “So dead people voted, and I think the number is close to 5,000 people. And they went to obituaries. They went to all sorts of methods to come up with an accurate number, and a minimum is close to about 5,000 voters.”

    Raffensperger pushed back, saying: “The actual number were two. Two. Two people that were dead that voted. So that’s wrong.” Trump reportedly insisted: “In one state, we have a tremendous amount of dead people. So I don’t know – I’m sure we do in Georgia, too. I’m sure we do in Georgia, too.”

    Raffensperger’s comments were bolstered by an Atlanta Journal-Constitution report in December 2021 that Georgia authorities confirmed a mere four cases of ballots cast in the name of dead people, with every instance involving a ballot cast by the relative of a deceased person. Georgia prosecutors are investigating whether Trump and his allies broke the law in their efforts to reverse election results.

    Trump also made the unsubstantiated claim that “a tremendous number of dead people” cast ballots in Michigan. “I think it was … 18,000. Some unbelievably high number, much higher than yours, you were in the 4-5,000 category.”

    The Trump campaign-commissioned report said analysts had “high confidence” there were only nine deceased voters in Fulton county, Georgia. The researchers also said they believed the “potential statewide exposure” of dead voters was 23, the newspaper said.

    The research also contradicted Trump’s claims that some 1,500 ballots came from dead voters and that over 42,000 voted twice in Nevada. The analysis expressed “high confidence” that just 12 deceased-voter ballots were submitted in Clark county, Nevada; they said the number of possible double voters ranged from 45 to just over 9,000.

    While the report does not outright state that Biden won the election, the analysis also said they did not have evidence to substantiate fraud claims about five decisive states’ results. “This result was not unexpected,” the analysis reportedly said. “Our analysis of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Nevada concluded that in each state the final tabulated result was mathematically possible given absentee request rates.”
    ________

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Tucker Carlson producer describes his audience as ‘dumb’ and ‘terrorists’

    More than a million pages of internal Fox messages have revealed that a producer for Fox News host Tucker Carlson described the show’s audience as “especially dumb” and “terrorists” who sleep with their cousins.

    The files released in connection to the $1.6bn defamation lawsuit against the company by Dominion Voting Systems also revealed that Fox Corporation executive Raj Shah, who had served as a spokesman in the Trump White House before making the jump, blasted the then-president’s personal lawyer and ex-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani as he spoke at the headquarters of the Republican National Committee on 19 November 2020.

    Mr Giuliani seemingly had black hair dye running down the side of his face as he made increasingly ludicrous claims of election fraud.

    “This sounds SO F****** CRAZY btw,” Mr Shah wrote during the diatribe, a few weeks after the 2020 election.

    “Rudy looks awful,” one person responded to Mr Shah.

    “He objectively looks like he was a dead person voting 2 weeks ago,” Mr Shah said. One of the false claims made about the election was that dead voters had helped President Joe Biden win.

    But when a Fox reporter soon after went on air and said some of what Mr Giuliani had said was “simply not true,” Mr Shah said, “this is the kinda s*** that will kill us”.

    “We cover it wall to wall and then we burn that down with all the skepticism,” he added.


    Fox News hosts, including Carlson, said in private that they believed the claims of fraud were false even as they amplified them on the air, the messages show.

    Mr Shah was far from the only Trump staffer to move back and forth between Mr Trump’s circle and Fox, The Washington Post noted.

    After Carlson had publically rebuked some of the outlandish claims pushed by lawyer Sydney Powell, which prompted pushback from her and other rightwing figures, Mr Shah texted a producer for Carlson about finding a middle ground and possibly taking time on the show to address her baseless claim that she had an affidavit linking Dominion and Venezuela.

    “Might wanna address this, but this stuff is so f****** insane. Vote rigging to the tune of millions? C’mon,” he wrote.

    Alex Pfeiffer, a producer working for Mr Carlson, wrote back that “it is so insane but our viewers believe it so addressing again how her stupid Venezuela affidavit isn’t proof might insult them”.


    Mr Shah suggested that Carlson mention the affidavit, saying it was “not new info, not proof” and then “pivot to being deferential”.

    Mr Pfeiffer, who has now left Fox, said the highwire act was “surreal”.

    “Like negotiating with terrorists,” he said, adding “but especially dumb ones. Cousin f****** types not saudi royalty.”

    Three days before the Capitol riot, Mr Shah texted fellow ex-White House spokesman Josh Raffel.

    Mr Raffel noted to Mr Shah that the White House public schedule was vague, simply saying that Mr Trump would be making “many calls and have many meetings” and “work from early in the morning until late in the evening”.

    “I think what they meant is The President will wake up early and commit many, many crimes including but not limited to obstruction of justice, attempted fraud, and treason in an effort to conduct a coup. Then he’ll fly to a rally in furtherance of the same,” Mr Raffel wrote.

    “It’s really disheartening,” Mr Shah said. “The only clear cut evidence for voter fraud is the failed attempts from Trump.”

    The Independent has attempted to reach Mr Shah, Mr Pfeiffer, Mr Raffel, and Fox News for comment.
    ___________

    Hey remember when 2000 Mules was the great hope for the election deniers?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X