Fraud
-
wrote on 6 Mar 2021, 12:58 last edited by
Yeah it's WND , but the statements are interesting...
https://www.wnd.com/2021/03/texas-ag-can-tell-lots-election-fraud/
-
wrote on 6 Mar 2021, 13:23 last edited by
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
-
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
wrote on 6 Mar 2021, 19:36 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Fraud:
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
Was that what the man said?
-
@doctor-phibes said in Fraud:
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
Was that what the man said?
wrote on 6 Mar 2021, 22:13 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Fraud:
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
Was that what the man said?
No, but it was clearly inferred.
-
@doctor-phibes said in Fraud:
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
Was that what the man said?
No, but it was clearly inferred.
wrote on 6 Mar 2021, 22:44 last edited by@doctor-phibes said in Fraud:
@doctor-phibes said in Fraud:
You notice the claims have got a lot less specific since people started getting sued for defamation?
The inference that all the fraud is one-way is laughable.
Was that what the man said?
No, but it was clearly inferred.
You have given in to your own biases.
-
wrote on 7 Mar 2021, 02:35 last edited by
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
-
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
wrote on 7 Mar 2021, 02:46 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Fraud:
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
How much fraud is there on both sides?
I want you to point that out to me. The logic tree goes like this:
- Is there fraud?
- If so, how much?
- Where dies it primarily occur?
- Who benefits the most?
- How do we eliminate fraud?
-
@taiwan_girl said in Fraud:
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
How much fraud is there on both sides?
I want you to point that out to me. The logic tree goes like this:
- Is there fraud?
- If so, how much?
- Where dies it primarily occur?
- Who benefits the most?
- How do we eliminate fraud?
wrote on 7 Mar 2021, 03:10 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Fraud:
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
How much fraud is there on both sides?
I want you to point that out to me. The logic tree goes like this:
- Is there fraud?
- If so, how much?
- Where dies it primarily occur?
- Who benefits the most?
- How do we eliminate fraud?
I dont know that answer, but human nature being human nature, the logic answer would be that both sides commit it equally. LOL
I agree that there is some fraud that occurs, but my opinion is that it is a super small amount and the "net" result for one side or the other is almost zero.
I do agree that there should be no fraud however.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Fraud:
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
How much fraud is there on both sides?
I want you to point that out to me. The logic tree goes like this:
- Is there fraud?
- If so, how much?
- Where dies it primarily occur?
- Who benefits the most?
- How do we eliminate fraud?
I dont know that answer, but human nature being human nature, the logic answer would be that both sides commit it equally. LOL
I agree that there is some fraud that occurs, but my opinion is that it is a super small amount and the "net" result for one side or the other is almost zero.
I do agree that there should be no fraud however.
wrote on 7 Mar 2021, 03:19 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in Fraud:
@taiwan_girl said in Fraud:
So, if fraud is on both sides, dont they kind of cancel each other out and the end result is if there was not fraud at all?
:man-shrugging:
How much fraud is there on both sides?
I want you to point that out to me. The logic tree goes like this:
- Is there fraud?
- If so, how much?
- Where dies it primarily occur?
- Who benefits the most?
- How do we eliminate fraud?
I dont know that answer, but human nature being human nature, the logic answer would be that both sides commit it equally. LOL
I agree that there is some fraud that occurs, but my opinion is that it is a super small amount and the "net" result for one side or the other is almost zero.
I do agree that there should be no fraud however.
In other words, you don't have a single damn idea, LOL.