@WorldSigh Unless there is proof to the contrary or is "Umm, ok" all you got?

@maxmaccc

Oh Max, you Protestant British Parliament exploding, Guy Fox, contrarian, sometimes I just get bored and tired of repeatedly posting links and articles to the dozens and dozens of eyewitness accounts and video evidence of the breathtaking election fraud fest that is the 2020 election. I suspect, you are well aware of the evidence. If not, perhaps it’s time to get your optical prescription updated. If you do decide to do some actual research, try somewhere other than BBC or CNN. Independent (non MSM) coverage of the election fraud hearings in Michigan, Arizona, etc., would be a good place to start. Make your own fun. I’m not here to entertain itinerant trolls.

@WorldSigh Arizona and Michigan, isn't that where the election results have been certified even after a recount which increased Bidens numbers?
Are you referring to the failed court cases regarding fraud, thrown out due to lack of evidence?
Regarding those eyewitness accounts, are they along similar lines of the latest incoherent rant by Melissa Carone? Is she someone you would consider a credible witness?
Eyewitness accounts are meaningless without evidence to back them up. She claimed her life and the lives of her family have been threatened with no evidence to back up those claims. No Emails, no social media posts, no police reports.Do you consider it be reasonable to question any eyewitness testimony if there is no evidence to back up their claims?
My research is never done from any media outlets. I post from sources that are easily digestible, the BBC for example because no one wants to read pages of research data. If the BBC(or any other news outlet) broadcast information that contradicted research data, i would not post it and furthermore, i would challenge it.
I'll refrain from the attempts at personal insults as i find them an unnecessary, infantile distraction from the issues.

@maxmaccc

"Eyewitness accounts are meaningless"? That is a seriously messed up standard you have. How about when the eyewitnesses have sworn affidavits carrying a prison sentence for perjury? How about when there is video evidence of fraud? How about statistical impossibilities like tens of thousands of votes all for Biden, being counted within minutes of poll watchers being told the count was on hold until the next day? How about counties having voter turnout in excess of 100%?

There are far too many videos and accounts of fraud to post. Here are a few links for you to explore:

Here is a bit of the Pennsylvania hearing, an insane amount of fraud! Of course, witnesses describing what they saw is "meaningless", right?

"The Georgia election was stolen for Joe Biden. That is the only viable conclusion one can come to after seeing what was presented for the first time during the Georgia legislature hearings Thursday morning. In it, we see voter fraud happening before our eyes.

Attorney Jackie Pick presented video evidence that Georgia election officials in that State Farm Arena tabulation center instructed press and ballot observers to leave around 10:20 pm on election night because counting was going to stop until the morning. We can see the observers leave while four people stayed behind doing nothing. Once the observers were gone, the four ballot counters sprung into action, pulling boxes of ballots from under their tables to continue counting."
[noqreport.com]

Illegal vote harvesting in Texas!

Detroit elections, where 72% of absentee votes do not match registered voters!
[archive.vn]

@WorldSighYou start with cherry picking a partial quote "eyewitness accounts are meaningless" The full quote, as you are fully aware is " eyewitness accounts are meaningless WITHOUT EVIDENCE TO BACK THEM UP", naughty, naughty.
Affidavits that contain vague or second-hand accounts may be hard to prove as false. There are also many scenarios where a witness just misunderstands the situation or is mistaken in what they believe they heard or saw.

For instance, in the Trump vs. Wayne County, Judge Kenny wrote in his ruling, “Plaintiffs’ affiants did not have full understanding of TCF absent ballot tabulation.” He said if plaintiffs’ affiants would have participated in pre-election training sessions, they would have had a better understanding of the process. Many claims could be easily explained by election officials.

So technically - yes - if a person signs an affidavit with false information, they could be charged with perjury. But proving the person willfully lied can prove to be quite difficult in many cases.

"How about statistical impossibilities like tens of thousands of votes all for Biden, being counted within minutes of poll watchers being told the count was on hold until the next day?"
Credible Citation needed for that conspiracy theory.

"How about counties having voter turnout in excess of 100%?"
Again, Credible citation needed.
You think that credible evidence is represented by Republican senators, Tim Pool, a debunked video and Giuliani? Really?