Absolute evidence of election fraud

Read it and weep fellas! They got em!



Biden’s Department of Justice has charged a Trump voter who had 58,000 followers on Twitter with election interference because he posted a meme in 2016 telling Democrats to vote for Hillary Clinton via text as a joke. He is now being charged for a MEME!

We’re a banana republic.

Amazing that the DOJ and the courts ignored and dismissed thousands of credible claims of election and voter fraud and then choose to prosecute this?

What a joke.


This guy had a series of tweets in the month leading up to the election like this:

Apparently he duped 5,000 unique people into voting for Hillary this way. What a gem he is.

We should all petition for his immediate release!

There’s no way they can make an indictment stick.

This is utter nonsense to create a counter narrative against true election fraud.

Forget about all of the first amendment protections that present a barrier to prosecution in this case.

How can the justice department even quantify these votes were altered? They check the server and then go and get sworn statements from those people? And then do they check them against voter registrations? And voter lists for 2016?

This is an impossible case. The only way the state wins is if they twist his arm and get a plea because he’s terrified of the Feds and doesn’t have the money to defend himself in protracted litigation.

This has nothing to do with fraud. It’s interference, as labeled, and it has nothing to do with 2020. It should’ve been prosecuted 4 years ago but, big surprise, it wasn’t

Lol, you guys bring up the 1st amendment for everything. that’s like saying you can raise money for a cause, then pocket all the money, and then say it was your 1st amendment right to lie.

No votes were altered, but they can probably track down whether these people believed they legally voted and didn’t otherwise do so as a result.

And in all this outrage, do you really think what this person did was ok? Are you excusing their behavior? Because this goes much further than “a stupid meme.”

Nope. A transaction would default to contract law. There would be an expectation of “performance” or “that which is required by a contract.” What you bring up isn’t a matter of a 1st amendment protected activity.

But political speech? And making humorous memes on a public platform? All first amendment.

Now - I think the DOJ will get a plea out of him. He’s facing a ridiculous 10 years. He probably doesn’t want to spend 250k defending himself so he’ll buckle. But if he had competent counsel pro Bono, he’d win the case.

This is the problem with our system. It ensures people in this bureaucratic system that takes years to process through. It bankrupts them. So people without the resources to fight just simply plea. And then every says “look, they were guilty!!!”

I’m not “excusing” anything. I’m saying his actions were constitutionally protected depending on how they are framed.

That wasn’t a humorous meme. It was a serious attempt at getting people to think they voted. I can’t believe you can’t see the difference.

Excuse me? I thought it was hilarious. And I’m a neutral observer. How can you discount my opinion?

Hey 305 - should this woman be indicted?

I’m not saying it’s not funny. I’m saying, whether or not it was funny, it was also a serious attempt to deprive people of their vote.

Maybe? She didn’t go so far as to provide a number to text, so it was impossible for people to text by vote based on her video, but maybe?

Do you have a point or is this classic whataboutism?

You mean the number that when you called it - told you to vote in person?

You just proved damages if Hillary for America had to actually co-opt the number and respond to the fake ad.


This isn’t a civil case. Damages are irrelevant in a federal criminal probe.

The question is, and only is, “did the defendant violate the statute”. Whatever that statute is.

But one thing this does do is makes it much harder to prove that any votes were altered.

First, no votes were “altered.” The accusation is people voted by text and in turn did not vote in real life, because they believed they legally voted.

Proving this will be the same as before. You track down the people who voted by text, contact them, see if they voted.

And I’m sorry if you think the Hillary co-opting the message a few days before election day resulted in no one being disenfranchised, but that’s just naive.

This guy is a piece of work that should probably be prosecuted.

Correct, so IF (big if) they did… then it would have altered their vote. Instead of a vote for Hillary, there would be none.

So you get their sworn statement huh? They become affiants or declarants in the case right? They swear under penalty of our jury? I find this funny because this a month ago you guys said this wasn’t sufficient evidence lol.

What are you sorry about? Again - this is a criminal case. Do we even know the statute he is accused of violating? We should start there right?

Let’s pull it up and take a look. Maybe disenfranchisement is irrelevant? I don’t know. Need to know the charge.

Ok - so according to Bloomberg, he is accused of

Section 241 of Title 18 is the civil rights conspiracy statute. Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes, Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.


If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;…

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Interesting because immediately we see the statute demands that “2 or more” persons need to conspire. Are they counting his faux Twitter profile as a person? Is there a co conspirator that I haven’t heard about?

And this isn’t even over election interference or disenfranchising voters, from a technical legal standpoint.

They are accusing this man of a conspiracy to injure, threaten, or intimidate persons. Very broad. It speaks to their desperation to make him cop to a plea.

No, that’s a step but I would verify through voting records.

That was covered in the tweet you linked:


No, it’s over them depriving people of their constitutional right to vote, though not sure why you’re splitting hairs.

Because that’s not what the statute says.

I linked that tweet? I don’t see it (where I linked it). I linked Cernovich. Is it in his tweet?

You don’t think so?

The statute says, “oppress the free exercise or enjoyment of any right.” You don’t equate that to depriving someone’s constitutional right to vote?

Your tweet was a retweet of that one. I had (wrongly, again) assumed you read the source… :wink: