You believed them when they had no evidence. Why not now?

[HipKat]

They are all admitting it was just a lie. A big lie. But the MAGAs refuse to accept it.

Ex-Trump attorney admits statements about 2020 election were false

Jenna Ellis was censured by a disciplinary judge in Colorado Wednesday, in the latest effort to hold accountable attorneys who boosted former President Donald Trump's 2020 election reversal gambits.

Ellis signed a stipulation stating that several comments she made about the 2020 election violated professional ethics rules barring reckless, knowing or intentional misrepresentations by attorneys, according to documents posted by Colorado's Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel. As part of the stipulation, Ellis agrees to pay $224. 

Among the false statements highlighted in the stipulation were comments by Ellis on social media and in TV appearances claiming that the Trump campaign had evidence the election was "stolen."

"The public censure in this matter reinforces that even if engaged in political speech, there is a line attorneys cannot cross, particularly when they are speaking in a representative capacity," Jessica Yates, attorney regulation counsel for the Colorado Supreme Court, said in a statement.

Michael Melito, an attorney for Ellis, told CNN in a statement, "My client remains a practicing attorney in good standing in the State of Colorado. In a very heated political climate, we have secured that correct outcome."

The censure was first reported by the Colorado Newsline. 

The stipulation was approved by Disciplinary Presiding Judge Bryon M. Large on Wednesday in an opinion posted alongside the judge's censure. 

The Attorney Regulation Counsel's office had previously indicated it was preparing a charge against Ellis, but with the announcement of the censure, the office said in a statement that it "is not currently pursuing any other charges against Ms. Ellis."

[Toofast80]

10 minutes ago, HipKat said:

They are all admitting it was just a lie. A big lie. But the MAGAs refuse to accept it.

Ex-Trump attorney admits statements about 2020 election were false

Jenna Ellis was censured by a disciplinary judge in Colorado Wednesday, in the latest effort to hold accountable attorneys who boosted former President Donald Trump's 2020 election reversal gambits.

Ellis signed a stipulation stating that several comments she made about the 2020 election violated professional ethics rules barring reckless, knowing or intentional misrepresentations by attorneys, according to documents posted by Colorado's Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel. As part of the stipulation, Ellis agrees to pay $224. 

Among the false statements highlighted in the stipulation were comments by Ellis on social media and in TV appearances claiming that the Trump campaign had evidence the election was "stolen."

"The public censure in this matter reinforces that even if engaged in political speech, there is a line attorneys cannot cross, particularly when they are speaking in a representative capacity," Jessica Yates, attorney regulation counsel for the Colorado Supreme Court, said in a statement.

Michael Melito, an attorney for Ellis, told CNN in a statement, "My client remains a practicing attorney in good standing in the State of Colorado. In a very heated political climate, we have secured that correct outcome."

The censure was first reported by the Colorado Newsline. 

The stipulation was approved by Disciplinary Presiding Judge Bryon M. Large on Wednesday in an opinion posted alongside the judge's censure. 

The Attorney Regulation Counsel's office had previously indicated it was preparing a charge against Ellis, but with the announcement of the censure, the office said in a statement that it "is not currently pursuing any other charges against Ms. Ellis."

Man, you are stuck on this like a dung beetle is to a pile of poo! 🤣

[f8ta1ity54]

1. They are too stupid to understand 

2. They understand, but admitting they were conned would be too emotionally damaging so they continue to live in fantasy land.

[ICRockets2]

10 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

 

2. They understand, but admitting they were conned would be too emotionally damaging so they continue to live in fantasy land.

"I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain." -James Baldwin

[f8ta1ity54]

Just now, ICRockets2 said:

"I imagine one of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, they will be forced to deal with pain." -James Baldwin

Unfortunately, there will be a generation of people who will never know who James Baldwin is. 

[ICRockets2]

5 minutes ago, f8ta1ity54 said:

Unfortunately, there will be a generation of people who will never know who James Baldwin is. 

Yeah, you know there's no way any of his works are getting shelved in Florida as long as Milkshake Ron is running the show.

[SackMan518]

If it was a shoo in for Biden I see no issue why the Democrats wouldn't welcome forensic audits and all of those court cases. You'd think they'd be eager to prove that Trump lost fair and square.

[TonyasTaters]

39 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

If it was a shoo in for Biden I see no issue why the Democrats wouldn't welcome forensic audits and all of those court cases. You'd think they'd be eager to prove that Trump lost fair and square.

This dirty cop is a joke. Yells law and order against BLM but when his side does something wrong and the court makes a ruling he calls for a forensic audit. Dirty fucking racist cop. BTW there have been several forensic audits and they found NOTHING! I hope next time someone of color gets arrested you call for a forensic audit. How the fuck are you a cop?

[HipKat]

6 hours ago, Toofast80 said:

Man, you are stuck on this like a dung beetle is to a pile of poo! 🤣

And I will be until the MAGAs wake up and admit they're all in on a fucking piece of shit that's just using them to line his pockets

[HipKat]

5 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

If it was a shoo in for Biden I see no issue why the Democrats wouldn't welcome forensic audits and all of those court cases. You'd think they'd be eager to prove that Trump lost fair and square.

They did. Republicans lost, audits found no evidence. 

 

....and cost tax payers millions of dollars.....

Because Trump lied.....

......and now everyone is admitting it.

.....except Trump 

[SackMan518]

18 hours ago, HipKat said:

They did. Republicans lost, audits found no evidence. 

Are we going to hash out again the difference between simple recounts and forensic audits? They're two entirely different entities. As I said months ago, a regular recount is when I give you five $20 bills and 3 of them are counterfeit. No matter how many times you count it the total still equals $100 even though you only really have $40. As for the lawsuits, as you said, they were "laughed out of court" meaning they were never heard for "lack of standing."

Like I said, if Biden had the most votes in history (81 bazi-giga-jillion) from his basement campaign there should be no problem embarrassing Trump over it whether it's through the courts or forensic audits.

But there haven't been and that is VERY telling... It's kind of like trusting NFL referees with no replay allowed. Come on, don't pretend to be dumb. We know you know better.

[HipKat]

3 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Are we going to hash out again the difference between simple recounts and forensic audits? They're two entirely different entities. As I said months ago, a regular recount is when I give you five $20 bills and 3 of them are counterfeit. No matter how many times you count it the total still equals $100 even though you only really have $40. As for the lawsuits, as you said, they were "laughed out of court" meaning they were never heard for "lack of standing."

Like I said, if Biden had the most votes in history (81 bazi-giga-jillion) from his basement campaign there should be no problem embarrassing Trump over it whether it's through the courts or forensic audits.

But there haven't been and that is VERY telling... It's kind of like trusting NFL referees with no replay allowed. Come on, don't pretend to be dumb. We know you know better.

OMG! There were audits. Trump still lost

[Philly'sFinest]

18 hours ago, HipKat said:

And I will be until the MAGAs wake up and admit they're all in on a fucking piece of shit that's just using them to line his pockets

Anything that helps you sleep at night, chief

This could have been remedied by the courts looking at the case, or by the battleground states opening their books and their machines to prove it was fair and square. 

They didn't, and there's reason why.

I'll never stop because I know the election was stolen, and I cannot let such a crime stand. 

Your side will ensure that both sides will never come together, and that we will stay in opposition because you won't provide the irrefutable proof that it was free and fair.

[SackMan518]

This cartoon perfectly illustrates half the people on the Range and yet they never learn.

[SackMan518]

23 minutes ago, HipKat said:

OMG! There were audits. Trump still lost

Not forensic ones.

[TonyasTaters]

9 minutes ago, SackMan518 said:

Not forensic ones.

Yes you dirty cop there were. I am not sure you can take the stand as a cop anymore based on your responses. Rumor has it someone is looking into this. Dirty cop!

https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/01/forensic-audit-in-michigans-largest-pro-trump-county-finds-no-evidence-of-election-interference.html

 

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/state/2021/09/29/texas-2020-election-audit-ballots-vote-greg-abbott/5913085001/

[HipKat]

4 hours ago, Philly'sFinest said:

Anything that helps you sleep at night, chief

This could have been remedied by the courts looking at the case, or by the battleground states opening their books and their machines to prove it was fair and square. 

They didn't, and there's reason why.

I'll never stop because I know the election was stolen, and I cannot let such a crime stand. 

Your side will ensure that both sides will never come together, and that we will stay in opposition because you won't provide the irrefutable proof that it was free and fair.

NO EVIDENCE.

Until you come up with actual evidence instead of innuendo and wild theories, you look like someone who is obsessed

[HipKat]

4 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Not forensic ones.

OMFG. What was Arizona? What was Texas? Michigan completed the most comprehensive series of audits, beyond those 2.

TT is wrong, you can't be a cop. Cops have an preponderance for evidence. There is none for that election being stolen. Or your a shitty cop. 

Oh yeah, FORENSIC AUDITS.

[SackMan518]

2 minutes ago, HipKat said:

OMFG. What was Arizona? What was Texas? Michigan completed the most comprehensive series of audits, beyond those 2.

TT is wrong, you can't be a cop. Cops have an preponderance for evidence. There is none for that election being stolen. Or your a shitty cop. 

Oh yeah, FORENSIC AUDITS.

Those were very limited in scope and didn't cover the entire states. It's like if someone called in a tip that you had a drug stash in your house and I show up only to check your backyard shed.

[HipKat]

2 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Those were very limited in scope and didn't cover the entire states. It's like if someone called in a tip that you had a drug stash in your house and I show up only to check your backyard shed.

Which would make you a Barney Fife

Oh brother... they did the audits in contested counties. And if those states allowed THOSE audits, then why not other counties?

 

[Philly'sFinest]

2 hours ago, HipKat said:

NO EVIDENCE.

Until you come up with actual evidence instead of innuendo and wild theories, you look like someone who is obsessed

Evidence galore

Myself, Sack, and others have posted it, but you refuse to acknowledge it. 

I'm not interested in beating a dead horse, and I'd gladly admit defeat if I had even a hint of reason to believe that it wasn't stolen. I simply refuse to turn a blind eye to possibly the greatest crime in American history. 

I know that it will eventually become another conspiracy theory that was proven to in actuality be fact, but you and the rest of the TDS/sheep will never acknowledge the truth...even if it's confirmed 100%

[HipKat]

14 minutes ago, Philly'sFinest said:

Evidence galore

Myself, Sack, and others have posted it, but you refuse to acknowledge it. 

I'm not interested in beating a dead horse, and I'd gladly admit defeat if I had even a hint of reason to believe that it wasn't stolen. I simply refuse to turn a blind eye to possibly the greatest crime in American history. 

I know that it will eventually become another conspiracy theory that was proven to in actuality be fact, but you and the rest of the TDS/sheep will never acknowledge the truth...even if it's confirmed 100%

You haven't posted a fucking thing. Bellweather counties?? That's not evidence

[IrishLass]

Oh, I thought from the thread title this was about Covid origins and the vaccines.

So why ARE you still believing those Big Lies? Time for another booster? It'll keep you "safe."

[SackMan518]

9 hours ago, HipKat said:

You haven't posted a fucking thing. Bellweather counties?? That's not evidence

1. Four of the seven most extreme vote dumps decided the election for Joe Biden.  This alone is bizarre and fundamentally cuts against his narrative of moderate increases in suburban and exurban areas.  Moreover, the distribution is “heavy-tailed” and these vote dumps are vastly more “co-extreme” than even the points around the 99.5th percentile (the dotted black line in the graph above).
2. These four vote dumps were quantifiably far more extreme than virtually every other vote dump, with only a few others as extreme in their aberration from the inverse pattern observed elsewhere.
3. The odds of these three states (GA, WI, MI) being so well-represented at the top of the distribution is just over 1%.  And when you factor in that a vote dump in GA is the 9th most extreme point, the odds that these three states have five of the top ten most extreme vote dumps drop to a mere 0.00337%.  Clearly, there’s something different about these states than others, including other blue states, or even other Midwestern states where a deep-blue urban population offsets the red rest of the state (e.g. Illinois, Minnesota), or states like Colorado, Texas, or Oregon, where the urban areas are also vastly more Democratic than the rest of the state.
4. These vote spikes all occurred in the same five-hour period.  Wisconsin and Michigan both spent around eighteen hours counting votes, and the count took several days in Georgia. We have since learned that the “pipe burst” story in deep-blue Georgia was never in fact true.
5. This five hour period remains a period of great controversy surrounding how the vote counting was “stopped.”  Recently, we learned that the story of a “pipe bursting” in Georgia was in fact not true.  Combine that with the results shown in this piece, and an obvious picture comes into view: In all three states, the count was “stopped” to give cover for electoral fraud on the scale of hundreds of thousands of votes which were released in the middle of the night, hoping few would notice.

[SackMan518]

 

1 – Total vote:
President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent. By way of comparison, President Obama was comfortably reelected in 2012 with 3.5 million fewer votes than he received in 2008.

Trump’s vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him. He did extraordinarily well with rural male working-class whites.

2 – Minority vote:
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.

3 – Hispanic vote:
Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico.

4 – History:
Bellwether states swung further in Trump’s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America’s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the electoral college after winning this trio, and that 1960 defeat to John F. Kennedy is still the subject of great suspicion.

5 – Cities
Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. 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.

6 – Counties
We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.

7 – Down ballot votes:
Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down-ballot coattails; Biden did not. The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a ‘red wave’ in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests. Trump’s party did not lose a single state legislature and actually made gains at the state level.

8 – Impossibility:
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.