What's new

Election Fraud


babe

Well-Known Member
Doubling and tripling down on being dumb good job!
Your opinion here is without evidence, meritless, baseless denial in the form of a personal attack. One would wonder if you are applying Saul Alinsky strategy for a political purpose. Red at least advances facts and reason.
 


Ron Mexico

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Your opinion here is without evidence, meritless, baseless denial in the form of a personal attack. One would wonder if you are applying Saul Alinsky strategy for a political purpose. Red at least advances facts and reason.
There is no reason or facts with you though. So what's the point? It's obvious you haven't done any research on this except be a good little parrot. Political purpose is your thing, you don't need to push that on me. It's amusing for you to call personal attack when most your posts are that including the last two to me. But if you really want some information to counter your silly statement here you go.

 

babe

Well-Known Member
There was one recall ballot, with two questions. Recall or don’t recall Newsom was the first question, answer yes or no. If one answered yes, there were other candidates to pick, the second question on the ballot. The SF article in fact states that all 300 recall ballots were UNOPENED, and NOT DELIVERED. Get it? Undelivered to the home addresses yet. (I missed that “undelivered” part at the time, but the facts still screamed mail theft in service to identity theft, and being bundled would have suggested undelivered, in hindsight). So how can you say all 300 ballots voted to recall Newsom, if those ballots were undelivered, and therefore not yet filled in at all?? It’s OK to be mistaken, babe. I’m sure I make mistakes every day. But in your rush to confirm your own conspiracy theory, you did not carefully read the SF article. That article stated, in speaking of the police dept.’s second Facebook post: “This second post, critically, did not mention the fact the 300 ballots — all unopened and not delivered — were among thousands of pieces of mail.”. Unopened and not delivered, babe, means not yet delivered to the homes of eligible voters. AI-O-Meter assumed delivered, but not yet retrieved by the homeowner from his/her curbside box. I assume that’s why he speculated that someone had rifled curbside boxes before people retrieved their daily mail.
So I went looking for the factson the Torrance CA incident. Amazingly bad reporting.

Here is the best article of the bunch:


It has the facts essential to the discussion of the case. The 300 recall ballots (not Newsom ballots) had just that day begun to be mailed out. So it was outgoing postal service. The 300 ballotgs were among "Thousands" of pieces of mail. All reports, even on Aug 23, list an assortment of items including credit cards in various people's names, a gun, drugs. No cash mentioned. This article describes in general that investigators looked though all his stuff including electronic crap for any sign of a plan to commit voter fraud, and found none. Some of the articles included pics of some of the sacks. I thought Mail bags used by the USPS had a USPS stamp, usually made of canvas. When did the US PS start using paper bags. But the stuff appears to organized, the pouches uniform in nature, with dividers even, so maybe they are real US PS stuff.

Another good report was The Hill:

This was the day the ballots became news. They had the facts pretty good. Unopened, untampered ballots not delievered to the voters they were mailed to. All the other crap. So "Recall ballots" not Newsom Ballots, so there is no tally of votes. The voters got replacement ballots.

So all my gibberish about statistics does not bearf any relevance.

Looks like three different units launched investigations on the case. Local police, the USPS, and a government oversight unit concerned with integrity in public officials.

The perp seems to have had no contacts with any election officials or any political connections. Ya know, stealing outgoing mail from a post office is where you'd want to go if you wanted to "harvest" some ballots, and other stuff could just be incidental. That's why the cops looked for his cell phone, ipad, laptop, etc.

What he could have done if not caught is the next issue. It's like the caches of mail/ballots found dumped by some damn lazy postal worker in a ditch or a ravine.

If you don't want ballots voted wrong somehow, you have to have a tracking system that verifies the voter, and you need a way for the voter or election auditors to check how each ballot gets verified and counted. At a polling place, you have people sitting there looking at ID offered, checking the address on the voter rolls along with the damn signature. Photo ID.

If anyone can't come to the poll, there are other secure ways to get the ballot to them and verify all that. Lotsa volunteers, everything under a camera with adverfsarial witnesses, all that.

If you don't want to cheat, you have no valid objection to checking all that.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
There is no reason or facts with you though. So what's the point? It's obvious you haven't done any research on this except be a good little parrot. Political purpose is your thing, you don't need to push that on me. It's amusing for you to call personal attack when most your posts are that including the last two to me. But if you really want some information to counter your silly statement here you go.

This is a blatant lie, a complete denial of almost everything I write. There is always some line of reason, whether valid or not, always some bit of alleged fact, whether true or not, in everything I write, even complete fantasy stuff. The parrot comment is completely off the wall. There is no one for me to parrot. My stuff is always original, different from whatever source I refer to, because I don't just copy and paste, or repeat anyone. Whatever the source, I apply my own reason, or imagination.

Once in a while, I even change my mind when discussing something with a reasoned conversant who has some facts. Or reasons. That's why I talk to people, or post crap in here. I am not an activist pushing something for anybody else, just myself pushing my own ideas.

I've done a fair amount of study and reading on election fraud in general. The case of the Torrance CA arrest of the Hawthorne man was mostly the fault of bad reporting, or bad listening on my part. I assume stuff when the facts are not explicitly stated. "Newsom Ballots" raised in my mind the idea that they were ballots voted for Newsom, not unopened "Recall Ballots" that could be voted whichever way the possessor wanted.

I am in general a disbeliever in authority, and I will keep my questions open until I see the evidence. I don't think I'd care to go to the police station and with a warrant to inspect all the evidence here. Doesn't mean I wouldn't find something wrong if I did. But hey, we all pick our battles.

I did go to your proffered link. Silly stuff there. Dictionary definitions and crap.

No help in real life. In real life, you have people who don't know much about a lot of things. Everything they could think is likely some kind of question about what the facts are that they don't have. You can just dismiss people en masse because they think something might be wrong. There is always trouble in River City, and hardly anyone could tell you all of it.

A lot of people think Democrats conspire to vote for Democrats. Maybe. Maybe not. But who cares, they have every right in the world to do that. You generally need to get to some facts to believe someone is lying, to overturn a government, or get environmental legislation passed If you start to examine many groups acting in apparent cooperation on an issue, you shouldn't be surprised to see that they talk to one another or make plans to get it done. But someone on the other side of the issue will never know it all, and it they start talking about their opponents in vague terms, that's no damn crime, and nothing to call a "conspiracy theory".

The historical fact is there, as I stated, that in the early 1950s the CIA rolled out a strategy to combat certain public concerns "Conspiracy Theories" for the purpose of influencing political discussions. It was always used to discredit actual truths by the CIA. Once set out by the CIA, other organizations picked up the cue and advanced it.

No coincidence. No fluke. It was purposeful.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
@Ron Mexico

Here is a sorta contemporary even liberal discussion on the origin of the "Conspiracy Theory" hate/lunatic slur:


I'm old enough to know this is junk, because the term goes back to the 1950s. Sure it was not so commonplace. But it was there. I'd have to do some FOIA search of my own, I suppose. But a lot of people have done this on the CIA, pro and con already.

The idea that the CIA has "always" been at the psy-op game, the public management game, for political purposes, has always been "out there" since we knew there was even a CIA. Even when is was OSS.

this is not a good prospective subject for you to dismiss.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
@Ron Mexico

Here is a sorta contemporary even liberal discussion on the origin of the "Conspiracy Theory" hate/lunatic slur:


I'm old enough to know this is junk, because the term goes back to the 1950s. Sure it was not so commonplace. But it was there. I'd have to do some FOIA search of my own, I suppose. But a lot of people have done this on the CIA, pro and con already.

The idea that the CIA has "always" been at the psy-op game, the public management game, for political purposes, has always been "out there" since we knew there was even a CIA. Even when is was OSS.

this is not a good prospective subject for you to dismiss.

Pretty damn sure it goes back at least to the British Foreign Office of the 1700s.
 

babe

Well-Known Member
I didn't read the rest of these posts, but I'll take this as an admission that you were wrong.
Wrong about what.

The way you're dealing with this would make an idiot blush, but you're no damn idiot.

(restoring a thought posted here originally and perhaps removed, though I don't rule out other explanations)

there are people with ideological or political causes who believe their cause warrants deliberate lying, propaganda, or determined purposeful actions, such as sustained personal attacks or mischaracterizations to support their cause. A person who comes to a discussion thread with such a set of tactics, and few if any actual facts or reasoned remarks, is likely motivated more by a personal agenda rather than wanting to discuss the facts of an issue.

I'm not interested in doing the damned trial on every such person. Just sayin, Ron Mexico is smart enough to contribute to this discussion in a better way if he wants. And please do so.

(screenshot()
=+don't alter my posts.
 
Last edited:

babe

Well-Known Member
questions/issues recap

Al did a post about generic "ballot harvesting in California" with a link to the Torrance CA arrest of 8/16/21, the day after vote by mail ballots were sent out. The police found "thousands of pieces of mail" with over 300 unopened recall ballots. There has been no report yet about a postal service collection box or postal vehicle being robbed. No USPS location of the theft.

The place of theft is important in analysis of the crime(s). It should have been reported.

So Al's thesis was that a criminal might have been intent on perpetrating vote fraud, out looking to harvest the mailed out ballots before they were picked up by the addressees.

The police investigators reported that they looked at the perps's personal electronics...... communications...... to see if there was any evidience related to his intentions or purposes, and found that there was none specific to an intent of commit voter fraud. It was identity theft, bank fraud, credit card fraud, that sort of thing, and drug possession. The perp was wanted on other charges before being found with the mail.

People do indeed rob private mail boxes and collect all kinds of mail, and make use of it illegally. Has happened on my street. We had to close accounts and report it to the police, who found the perp who did that to us, and got him sent to jaiol.

So finding aj perp passed out with mail should not be taken as election fraud. The first Torrance police facebook post correctly stated that there was a lot of mail, and the 300+ unopened ballots. Then there was a second post that did not include that fact, which caused a firestorm of conservative accusations of election fraud. Pics of the stolenj ballots, all that. No mention of the other mail. And looking at the sacks opened up, the ballots were in banded lots. Go look at those pics.

If this stolen mail had been gathered from hundreds of mail boxes, the ballots would not be banded together. Go figure.

A competent police report would deal with facts like that. The news, the pics, the police report apparently (I haven'[t examined the actual police report) did not address that issue.

Bad reporting by some "liberal" news sources gave me the impression, the false and somewhat assumed notinn that they were "Newsom ballots", a set voted against recalling Newsom. That got me going with my statistical reasoning, which does apply to cases where a set of ballots is homogenous, all for one side of the issue. does njot apply to unopened ballots.

But if the perp went out robbing mail boxes and sorted the mail to band the ballots together, that is proof of an intent to hand over, or sell the ballots to interested parties. that would be proof of election fraud. Intent.

A set of banded ballots handed to a perp from a postal service worker or other official, with a perp like this, would be a foolish or reckless action. Drug addicts and criminals with warrants out for their arrest would be a bad idea for that project.
So if I were uinvestigating this crime, I wouldn't be done yet. I'd have to be looking for some reason why a perp would be sorting stolen mail from many mailboxes and looking for ideas he might have had about where he could cash in on them. Probably is an idea that is "out there" in CA.

This perp just hadn't found where to go with them, yet.

So all in all, the investigation found nothing that wasn't reported in the first police facebook post, and the firestorm of allegations was just a stupid omission fromthe second police facebook post that lent to the idea that the ballots were a distributed cache of illicit ballots, in transit to a vote harvesting unit.

Nothing relevant to the existence or non-existence of voter fraud by ballot harvesting. Does not disprove Al's thesis, just his cited incident, and that particular arrest.

A real vote harvesting operatioin would likely not be using a wanted felon with a warrant out for his arrest. It would be using paid activists who could be relied on.

HR1, which Al referred to, reveals a distinct and undeniable intent by the DNC and Pelosi and other Democrat politicians to remove every conceivable barrier to voter fraud. Criminal intent.

So, Red and Ron and Game, one arrest with incidental ballots in his posession, is irrelevant to the 4lection fraud issue at large.

And yes, the police did a sort of intentional omission of a critically important observation in their report, unless the pics or other obsrvations can prove the ballots were not sorted and banded together. That is proof of an intentional coverup of the ballot harvesting problem. Nobody would sort mail like that for no reason. With or without communications proving that reason.

Authorities always do this kind of cover-up/whitewashing. They are a set of self-interested people who will work together when necessary to look "good".
 

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
2020-21 Award Winner
We had someone empty our mailbox the other day. We had a couple of packages of masks from amazon sent through the mail, showed delivered, and the mailbox was empty.
 


Top