Was There A Server That Was Seized In Germany In The 2020 Election? Revisited 2024.

[Ingomike]

Could it be that Dominion didn't do the things that were claimed? Could it be that conservative sources made that **** up to serve a need for people to believe the election was literally stolen?

And what I mean by literally stolen, I mean votes actually flipped by some malicious system. If you claim such things you better be able to prove it in court, or not make the claim. It's plausible they did it. You can't report your plausible theories as fact and not expect to get sued. That's not lawfare.

They are suing media outlets because they reported what high ranking officials said, not the guy that said it. They are using this stuff to go after conservative media

 

[Creedmoor]

I knew something would replace HOA thread!

Yep, I'm IBTL on this one too.

 

[jamil]

You are demanding burdens of proof beyond the level of murder charges. I gave you a preponderance of the evidence and that is not good enough for you.

What? I just said that you have different standards for what is news. You said it's plausible. I agree. It's plausible. Is everything that is plausible news? You didn't give preponderance of the evidence. You posted a bunch of news articles from GWP that are mostly single-sourced. And then you yourself said, only elevated it to the level of "it's plausible".

It was reported as to what those quoted said.

You posted ~half dozen articles from GWP. Couldn't they have said it in one paragraph if it's just quoting? And just because an article quotes something, that's preponderance of the evidence? You don't get it both ways. It can't be both merely reporting "as to what those quoted said" AND rise to the level of preponderance of evidence.

The only preponderance of evidence there is is that they quoted people they claimed said stuff.

We all saw the vote tallies move in way’s never before seen with our own eyes, everything was there, but you guys waiting on the deep swamp to admit what they did with your impossible standards are ridiculous.

Impossible standards? How about any standards? From where I sit it looks like your standard of evidence is, my guy lost. Therefore it must have been cheating. So now let me make every fact and even non-facts point to literally changing votes.

Like I said many times since, stick to facts that clearly point to something. We have evidence that election rules were changed to make a "season of voting" rather than an election day. Deadlines were spread out beyond. People were allowed to vote by mail. People have been convicted of stuffing ballot collection boxes. If you want to believe the election was stolen, stick to what is more than just plausible.

 

[jamil]

They are suing media outlets because they reported what high ranking officials said, not the guy that said it. They are using this stuff to go after conservative media

High ranking officials. You mean that doofus Rudy Giuliani? I asked if it had occurred to you that maybe it was a bull **** claim. Apparently it hasn't.

What they're going after conservative media for is not merely reporting what people said. It's that having those people say it on their newscasts as if it were true. Did you read the court case they had against Fox News? The thing that might have saved Fox some money is if they'd done some reporting and actually could prove it happened. Would have been a **** ton cheaper.

 

[jamil]

Yep, I'm IBTL on this one too.

Nah. Mike's chill. And reasonable. This thread will be just fine.

 

[indyartisan]

Lt. General Thomas McInerney USAF ret. did some interviews back in 2019 and 2020 about the raid.
A hundred fact checkers say he was making up stories for what that is worth.

 

[phylodog]

I hate to quote the haggiest old hag who ever walked the earth but at this point, what difference does it make? How much more corruption do we have to see go unanswered before we just stop believing the system is going to do anything but continue allowing it? They could release every possible ounce of evidence to support the claims about this and nothing will come of it. Some no named fall guy somewhere might end up retiring early after a few months of political theater and people refusing to answer questions in front of congress but that would be the extent of it. Unless of course some new scandal pops up in which case it'll just be forgotten even sooner like everything else.

 

[Cynical]

I hate to quote the haggiest old hag who ever walked the earth but at this point, what difference does it make? How much more corruption do we have to see go unanswered before we just stop believing the system is going to do anything but continue allowing it? They could release every possible ounce of evidence to support the claims about this and nothing will come of it. Some no named fall guy somewhere might end up retiring early after a few months of political theater and people refusing to answer questions in front of congress but that would be the extent of it. Unless of course some new scandal pops up in which case it'll just be forgotten even sooner like everything else.

Sadly, I think you're right on all accounts. Nobody in D.C ever goes to jail unless you're connected to Trump. 535 Presidents in waiting hold endless oversight hearings where they are lied to by the people on the stand and nothing becomes of it other than the usual" The American people deserve the truth B.S" The American people deserve to see some people put in jail for doing things that the rest of us would get jail time for far less. I have zero faith in all the institutions that were once stalwart. FBI, secret service hell I dont even have faith in the election process since it goes on for 3 months or so. The only people who go to jail are middle management military while the rest of those ****ers get rich off of our tax dollars and back room deals. Rant over!

 

[Pepi]

What is coming our way? We don’t even know what already came…

Things can always get 'Worser'

 

[Ingomike]

Extrapolating bacon out of the poll over 80% that have an opinion believe it likely to have occurred.

Interesting…

 

[jamil]

Extrapolating bacon out of the poll over 80% that have an opinion believe it likely to have occurred.

Interesting…

Over 80% believe it was likely to have occurred?





Extrapolating? Wrong word, but anyway.

I voted for the response that expresses, 'I don't know', because I don't know if the wild ass claim is true or not; there was never any corroboration of facts that would reasonably indicate it was. But it certainly could have been true. It's that I don't know if it was true.

If I can't know that it was true, I also can't know that it was false. Best I can do is go by likelihood. And therein lies the problem with the claim. It's virtually unfalsifiable. Like the existence of God, I would have to take it on faith in the reporters that it's true. With no corroborating evidence, I'm not compelled to believe that there was a raid in Germany. Which is not the same thing as believing there was not.

The correct and reasonable analysis of the above data, is that 3/4 of the respondents did not have a strong belief either way. Or, it may also be that at least some of the respondents who voted bacon, like bacon more than they cared to have registered their opinion about their confidence in whether it happened or not. But to force reality to be favorable to your thinking, you predictably sweep away facts that tend to allow you to indulge your wistful thinking.

 

[KG1]

Over 80% believe it was likely to have occurred?

View attachment 377993



Extrapolating? Wrong word, but anyway.

I voted for the response that expresses, 'I don't know', because I don't know if the wild ass claim is true or not; there was never any corroboration of facts that would reasonably indicate it was. But it certainly could have been true. It's that I don't know if it was true.

If I can't know that it was true, I also can't know that it was false. Best I can do is go by likelihood. And therein lies the problem with the claim. It's virtually unfalsifiable. Like the existence of God, I would have to take it on faith in the reporters that it's true. With no corroborating evidence, I'm not compelled to believe that there was a raid in Germany. Which is not the same thing as believing there was not.

The correct and reasonable analysis of the above data, is that 3/4 of the respondents did not have a strong belief either way. Or, it may also be that at least some of the respondents who voted bacon, like bacon more than they cared to have registered their opinion about their confidence in whether it happened or not. But to force reality to be favorable to your thinking, you predictably sweep away facts that tend to allow you to indulge your wistful thinking.

It appears that IM is tossing out (extrapolating) the majority 18 IDK/bacon votes as if they never existed to favor his position with the remaining 7 votes, which is 6 out of 7 = 85% believe that it was likely something did happen.

 

[firecadet613]

It appears that IM is tossing out (extrapolating) the majority 18 IDK/bacon votes as if they never existed to favor his position with the remaining 7 votes, which is 6 out of 7 = 85% believe that it was likely something did happen.

If bacon wasn't an option, would those 18 folks have voted?

 

[Ingomike]

It appears that IM is tossing out (extrapolating) the majority 18 IDK/bacon votes as if they never existed to favor his position with the remaining 7 votes, which is 6 out of 7 = 85% believe that it was likely something did happen.

I do not play the grammar nazzi game precisely because I do not want to be the one with egg on my face. Thanks for explaining to @jamil the point and that it was proper usage…

 

[Ingomike]

If bacon wasn't an option, would those 18 folks have voted?

Probably not, just like every other election…

 

[foszoe]

Sounds like a democrat stacking the votes!

 

[Ingomike]

Sounds like a democrat stacking the votes!

Do you ever add to the discussion? Nope, never…

 

[foszoe]

Do you ever add to the discussion? Nope, never…

Not by your definition. You set such a high standard.

 

[jamil]

I do not play the grammar nazzi game precisely because I do not want to be the one with egg on my face. Thanks for explaining to @jamil the point and that it was proper usage…

Extrapolate doesn’t mean “to toss out”. Also, I’m not sure that you understood KG1’s post, because what he said supports what I said about ignoring data that doesn’t support the reality you want.

 

[jamil]

Do you ever add to the discussion? Nope, never…

I think he made a salient point.