Public-Choice

Much of the evidence for the first is public information

Organizing a fake electors plot is certainly illegal

This is a link to a letter from Jim Jordan and James Comer demanding documents from the FBI.

the person who replaces trump will be fun

Do you actually believe what you are clearly implying here - that when Trump says he wants to get rid of the beurocrats undermining democracy that this is actually his goal and by democracy, he's talking about the he same thing the founding fathers envisioned

It's very easy to Google.

Do you seriously think this 2x impeached 4x indicted 1x booted out of office former president is the same person who took office in 2016?

He tried to steal the electoral vote and that failed, he refused to let Biden's transition team in to prepare to take over, and he left Washington before the inauguration because his attempt to stay in power failed. He didn't transfer it over, we took it back.

The part about the FBI covering up his son's activities is complete bullshit.

as if Trump hasn't obviously committed serious crimes. 

Sources close to former President Trump say he would immediately reimpose his "Schedule F" executive order if he takes back the White House in the 2024 presidential elections, Axios' Jonathan Swan reports.

Former President Trump’s top allies are preparing to radically reshape the federal government if he is re-elected, purging potentially thousands of civil servants and filling career posts with loyalists to him and his "America First” ideology, people involved in the discussions tell Axios.

He walked away in 2020 because he failed to gain the support of the institutions that would be tasked with removing him. These institutions include the secret service, the DOJ, the military, etc.

We need to make it much easier to fire rogue bureaucrats who are deliberately undermining democracy or at a minimum just want to keep their jobs,

his behind the scenes plan to rid the government of all civil servants and replace them with loyalists who will do whatever he wants.

This comes in the wake of Trump mocking the brutal attack on the husband of a political rival Trump has rhetorically attacked many times before, calling for the execution of a top general over charges of not obeying his presidential will, and encouraging police to shoot shoplifters on the spot, not to mention January 6th. There is of course, so much more I could mention but I'd be here all day.

Do you believe Trump is a fascist and/or an authoritarian? Yes or No?

what makes you think this work isn't serving God?

Are you quoting Putin?

There is no objective morality. Morality is subjective. Thats why 2 persons can have completely different morality.

The microorganisms that live near such plumes have led some scientists to suggest them as the birthplaces of Earth's first life forms.

Objective morality means that it cannot contradict itself.

The mere fact that there is a moral disagreement tells you that morality is entirely subjective.

Two candidates are likely to absorb the Fed’s operating losses:

1. American taxpayers as a whole. Now that the Fed is incurring operating losses instead of surpluses that would otherwise be paid over to the US Treasury, federal budget deficits are commensurately larger, requiring the Treasury to sell more debt in order pay its bills. This is an obvious cost to American current and future taxpayers.
2. Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve system, which are required to buy and hold stock shares in their respective Fed district banks. The 1913 Federal Reserve Act specified that these member banks could be assessed for Fed system losses. If the Fed were to make this demand of its member commercial banks, they would be obligated to cover the Fed system’s losses. Again, there is no precedent for this.
   

Financial statements of the US Federal Reserve, which consists of the board of governors in Washington and twelve district reserve banks across the country, indicate that the consolidated system has generated both capital and operating losses for the past couple of years. The Fed was created in 1913 to issue and circulate an “elastic currency” that could respond to consumers’ demand for cash, end bank runs known then as “money panics,” and serve as a “lender of last resort” to the nation’s commercial banks. How is it possible that the Fed could be losing money after one hundred years of operation?

The debate has raged in the banking and finance communities. Two investigators, Paul Kupiec at the American Enterprise Institute and Alex Pollock at the Mises Institute, have analyzed Fed financial statements and presented their findings about these Fed losses in publications such as the Wall Street Journal and on the websites of the American Enterprise Institute, the Mises Institute, the Federalist Society, and Law and Liberty. The Wall Street Journal has produced a nontechnical video explaining how the Fed makes (and loses) money.

You are the last sad bastard to still believe that desperate lie.

I don't care what they tell us

Moreover, I've already explained why their numbers do not tell the story they are telling. Do you have anything to say about that? 

so it seems neither of us really know where they're getting any of their information from.

"After all counties closed the election in SURE, only 6,914,556 voters were credited with participation in the 2020 General Election. This reveals a voter deficit of 121,240."

There's your deficit.

This fully explains it

The apparent source of the misinformation amplified by Trump was a news release issued by Pennsylvania State Rep. Frank Ryan on Dec. 28, maintaining that a comparison of "county election results to the total number of voters who voted" in Pennsylvania revealed a discrepancy of over 203,000 ballots:

However, the Pennsylvania Department of State (DoS) issued a statement noting that the numbers obtained from the Statewide Uniform Registry of Electors (SURE) system by Ryan were not accurate because they were based on incomplete data. As the DoS observed, "a few counties have not completed uploading their vote histories," and that those as-yet-unreported numbers "would account for a significant number of voters":

Therefore the claim that there were more ballots cast than eligible voters is ludicrously false

I would tell you to Google it but I already put the information on your lap.

Sounds like another one of Trumps porn star mistresses

"Through the SURE system, the county voter registration commissions maintain a complete list of all eligible registered voters in the Commonwealth. As of December 2022, there were 8,700,826 registered voters. The charts in this section represent a high-level snapshot of the change in voter registration over both the previous calendar year and the four-year period since the end of 2018. Details broken down by county and party can be found in Appendices A and B."

Verity Vote is just the blog of a Trump Fan named Heather Honey

In 2020 a group of capable investigators who’ve provided investigation and intelligence training to large corporations and government agencies, performed supply chain audits, along with published scientists and engineers, volunteered to analyze issues of election integrity.

"This includes ballots with votes for one of the three major presidential candidates, all write-in votes, all over-votes, all under-votes (as reported by the 67 counties), and the 71K late mail ballots. After all counties closed the election in SURE, only 6,914,556 voters were credited with participation in the 2020 General Election. This reveals a voter deficit of 121,240."

They're not missing voters, they're ballots that were cast without voting for one of the three major candidates.

I'm pointing out that if something so easily verifiable was so egregiously off it would have gained much more attention that being relegated to the dark corners of the internet.

The vote total listed above represents the ballots cast for the three big candidates; Biden, Trump, and Jorgenson.