While We’re on the Subject of “No Evidence,” Might as Well Add This:

VIP’s [the Voter Integrity Project’s] sampling of the 2020 election discovered evidence of thousands of illegal ballots across numerous contested states.

For example, VIP found more than 1,000 people in both Georgia and Pennsylvania who used a post office address as their home address, and attempted to disguise the post office by adding “Apt,” Suite,” Unit” etc. at the end.

It is a violation of law in both states to use a post office as your home address.

Braynard’s group also found more than 20,000 people in Georgia and more than 8,000 people in Nevada who cast ballots although they no longer met the residency requirements of their respective states.

In Arizona, VIP sampled 2,044 voters and found 44 percent [!] did not request an absentee ballot, even though they reportedly received one.

Arizona law prohibits sending a ballot to a voter who has not requested one.

The project also discovered nearly 6,000 people voted in the 2020 election who no longer met the Arizona’s residency requirements.

Moreover, the sampling revealed 157 people who voted twice in the state.

Source

Like a Bad Supervillain Organization, Remember That DVS (Dominion Voting Sytems) Is Pronounced “Devious”

“No evidence”:

He earned the highest share of all minority votes for a Republican since 1960. Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016. Nationally, Joe Biden’s black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.

Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump’s direction. Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities, as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.

Another anomaly is found in the comparison between the polls and non-polling metrics. The latter include: party registrations trends; the candidates’ respective primary votes; candidate enthusiasm; social media followings; broadcast and digital media ratings; online searches; the number of (especially small) donors; and the number of individuals betting on each candidate.

Despite poor recent performances, media and academic polls have an impressive 80 percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. But, when the polls err, non-polling metrics do not; the latter have a 100 percent record. Every non-polling metric forecast Trump’s reelection. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump to lose, not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever, but every single one had to be wrong, and at the very same time; not an impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless.

Atypical voting patterns married with misses by polling and non-polling metrics should give observers pause for thought. Adding to the mystery is a cascade of information about the bizarre manner in which so many ballots were accumulated and counted.

The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:

1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers

2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio

3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions

4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures

5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’

6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing

7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes

8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law

9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.

If you think that only weirdos have legitimate concerns about these findings and claims, maybe the weirdness lies in you.

— Patrick Basham, director of The Democracy Institute, The Spectator, “Reasons Why the 2020 Presidential Election Is Deeply Puzzling”

.

Twitter: “Harrumph! Misinformation!”

Babesleaga Week 5 : Gina Lollobrigida vs Elizabeth Taylor

Good morning all, let us begin.

Gina Lollobrigida (2-2-0 Pts. 513) vs Elizabeth Taylor (3-1-0 Pts. 502)

Gina Lollobrigida
Elizabeth Taylor

Poll closes on Sunday December 6th at 9:00 am.

This poll is no longer accepting votes

Who do you prefer?
321 votes · 321 answers

Babesleaga Week 4 : Results and Standings

Past the halfway mark and heading for the home stretch.

Results

This poll is no longer accepting votes

Who do you prefer?
227 votes · 227 answers

This poll is no longer accepting votes

Who do you prefer?
189 votes · 189 answers

This poll is no longer accepting votes

Who do you prefer?
188 votes · 188 answers

This poll is no longer accepting votes

Who do you prefer?
225 votes · 225 answers
ContestantsRecordTotal Points
Grace Kelly4 – 0 – 0615
Sophia Loren3 – 1 – 0525
Elizabeth Taylor3 – 1 – 0502
Marilyn Monroe2 – 2 – 0566
Gina Lollobrigida2 – 2 – 0513
Ava Gardner2 – 2 – 0470
Jayne Mansfield0 – 4 – 0326
Jane Russell0 – 4 – 0260

This week’s matches. All polls close on Sunday December 6th at 9:00 am.

  • 10:00 am Gina Lollobrigida vs Elizabeth Taylor
  • 2:00 pm Sophia Loren vs Ava Gardner
  • 6:00 pm Jane Russell vs Marilyn Monroe
  • 8:00 pm Grace Kelly vs Jayne Mansfield