Just curious how the fck Clarence factually knows '... too few ballots were affected by the new rules for it to make a difference ... ', when as far as i'm aware there has never been any large scale multi-state/county official audit on how many ballots may or may not have been affected ..... Yet all these news article keep repeating 'not enough too make a difference...'.
It doesn’t help that trumps awful legal team can’t make a case to save their lives.
Yeah, fcking seriously. If that's the best money can buy - dude needs a refund.
Amazed he didn't get lin wood to appear as a surprise witness with an erroneously filed court proceeding to then chastised them all with " It was rhetorical hyperbole ..." (in his best trump accent), i would have actually paid to view that on live stream - he could've come out ahead on shekels ...
Widespread voting irregularities can trigger the entire election to be ruled invalid, regardless of specific vote totals. Speculations of "not enough votes to change election results" is a false narrative. The specific vote totals are irrelevant if widespread voting irregularities can be proven, because widespread voting irregularities void the election altogether.
Yes Ikr, its part of the pre-conceived narrative shut down of 'no wide spread election fraud' being proclaimed by everyone everywhere from the very next day after the election (before any one could even know ) then peppered with 'not enough to make a difference' .....
(post is archived)