Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

You mean the lies that the Trump team has been peddling?  Not sure why you want to promote that - the fraud is being done by Trump and Rudy to steal gullible people’s money.  Some people have realized it.

Oof - you donate 2.5 million for that sham and you deserve what you get.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 194
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I voted for him. I don’t like him but I stomached him - just not interested in what Democrats have to say in general type of thing. But that’s beside the point. Now that he has pretty clearly lost - I

Super hopeful that he would give a concession speech and put the good of the country ahead of himself, but really doubt he has it in him.    He’s opened my eyes in one way. I had no idea what g

I don't vote for a candidate because of love for the candidate. I vote for a candidate because of love for my country. Donald Trump caused so much harm, so much pain. I don't know if Biden can actuall

3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Dr. Navid Keshavarz-Nia seems to disagree with you. 

Just as Powell did before right?  Whats the track record thus far of people who thought it looked good for Trump’s legal challenges?

Not sure why anyone would feel confident in such things any longer?

And what did this Doctor say?  Is he referenced anywhere other than places like gateway pundit (because when I search I see a bunch of very questionable sources discussing him as “may be the one to save the election for Trump”)?  In what capacity is he speaking?  More things he thinks “could have happened” vs providing anything tangible that actually did happen?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Max Power said:
30 minutes ago, Roy L Fewks said:

I'm a Trump guy and I mostly agree with this. There are no fraud claims.

There are lots of irregularities but irregularities don't get elections overturned. 

Dr. Navid Keshavarz-Nia seems to disagree with you. 

I don't subscribe to Dr. Navin's newsletter. Can you link to his or her evidence of fraud? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Just as Powell did before right?  Whats the track record thus far of people who thought it looked good for Trump’s legal challenges?

Not sure why anyone would feel confident in such things any longer?

And what did this Doctor say?  Is he referenced anywhere other than places like gateway pundit (because when I search I see a bunch of very questionable sources discussing him as “may be the one to save the election for Trump”)?  In what capacity is he speaking?  More things he thinks “could have happened” vs providing anything tangible that actually did happen?

 

It’s all just wild conspiracy theories by people without any evidence.  Sho - I think you would be better served just ignoring these people who are still clinging to these conspiracy theories (thankfully the number appears to be dwindling).  You’re just wasting your time responding to every one of their posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:
5 minutes ago, Roy L Fewks said:

I don't subscribe to Dr. Navin's newsletter. Can you link to his or her evidence of fraud? 

https://www.scribd.com/document/486105599/Affidavit-of-Dr-Navid-Keshavarz-Nia-Phd#

This is his declaration attached to Powell's lawsuit.

I just read the entire thing and came to the irrefutable conclusion that it was wrong. And I have 3 mathematics degrees.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Dr. Navid Keshavarz-Nia seems to disagree with you. 

Nice of you to correct Sydney Powell’s spelling of his name in the filing. Should see that Kracken release by Monday (orTuesday, latest.) Incontrovertible evidence on its way. Any day now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

r/Trump and r/Conservative (or is r/Conservatives? always get them confused.) have gone private on Reddit overnight. Too many Biden supporters in there posting memes.

I requested to join r/Trump. Reply:

”I can no approve you without a verifiable post or comment history pertaining to Trump support or good faith respectable dinting debate.”

1) My posting karma there is 57K, and 2) I think I just figured out where they found Sydney Powell.

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Max Power said:

What is? An expert's statement on the data?

Expert opinions in the form of conclusions.  He can provide a sworn affidavit that includes facts, and can show how those facts support a conclusion, but only to the extent that it assists the trier of fact.  In this case he states conclusions without connecting the dots to facts, which makes it in admissible.  
 

Many of the suits filed based on a version of this conspiracy have been supported by similar affidavits.   In nearly every case, the judges considering these motions have pointed to a lack of admissible evidence.  This is more of the same.

Edited by the rover
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, the rover said:
15 minutes ago, Max Power said:

What is? An expert's statement on the data?

Expert opinions in the form of conclusions.  He can provide a sworn affidavit that includes facts, and can show how those facts support a conclusion, but only to the extent that it assists the trier of fact.  In this case he states conclusions without connecting the dots to facts, which makes it in admissible.  
 

Many of the suits filed based on a version of this conspiracy have been supported by similar affidavits.   In nearly every case, the judges considering these motions have pointed to a lack of admissible evidence.  This is more of the same.

:goodposting:

Powell knows her case will be instantly dismissed, which is part of her strategy, imo.

The goal is not to win, imo. The goal is to show the base that they presented "evidence" to court. That "evidence" will be far more valuable as a perpetual fundraising tool.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, the rover said:

Expert opinions in the form of conclusions.  He can provide a sworn affidavit that includes facts, and can show how those facts support a conclusion, but only to the extent that it assists the trier of fact.  In this case he states conclusions without connecting the dots to facts, which makes it in admissible.  
 

Many of the suits filed based on a version of this conspiracy have been supported by similar affidavits.   In nearly every case, the judges considering these motions have pointed to a lack of admissible evidence.  This is more of the same.

He says in his statement that he came to his conclusion studying the data sets. He also indicated he is pulling from SIGINT sources which are surely classified. 

This guy is an expert in cyber fraud. If he makes a definite statement claiming there was fraud, don't you think it's in America's best interests to hear this out?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Max Power said:

Well I put no stock into unnamed sources from the Daily Beast. I also don't think Trump would regain enough momentum in 2024 to be viable, so I put Trump 2024 at a 0%.

Right now there are several states who still need to get through fraud/irregularities claims in court to uphold their certification process. 2020 isn't over yet. 

He's already had around 30 lawsuits laughed at and thrown out of court. How many more does the country need to endure? Ridiculous.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Max Power said:

He says in his statement that he came to his conclusion studying the data sets. He also indicated he is pulling from SIGINT sources which are surely classified. 

This guy is an expert in cyber fraud. If he makes a definite statement claiming there was fraud, don't you think it's in America's best interests to hear this out?

As a piece of evidence, it’s inadmissible.  You don’t get to submit conclusions as evidence.  You have to show your work.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Max Power said:

He says in his statement that he came to his conclusion studying the data sets. He also indicated he is pulling from SIGINT sources which are surely classified. 

This guy is an expert in cyber fraud. If he makes a definite statement claiming there was fraud, don't you think it's in America's best interests to hear this out?

I admire the tenacity you've shown in trying to wishcast a reversal of fortune for Trump, but unless you have a law degree and practice the law as a profession, do you ever stop to think that maybe - just maybe - you might be out of your element debating with people who do practice law as a career? 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Max Power said:

https://www.scribd.com/document/486105599/Affidavit-of-Dr-Navid-Keshavarz-Nia-Phd#

This is his declaration attached to Powell's lawsuit.

Just for giggles, I read all 9 pages. I’m a boarder line expert in this field and the Dr guy is full of it. Everyone of his assertions is speculation. It also accepts and aligns with the statement from Dominion that in order for this attack to be successful thousands of people (with an uncorroborated stolen thumb drive) would need to have been involved.  Also, don’t forget he states that since China is a bad actor they must have been involved in this fraud since they make components put into the Dominion voting systems. 

Edited by JAA
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Max Power said:

He says in his statement that he came to his conclusion studying the data sets. He also indicated he is pulling from SIGINT sources which are surely classified. 

This guy is an expert in cyber fraud. If he makes a definite statement claiming there was fraud, don't you think it's in America's best interests to hear this out?

As a general matter, courts typically take the position that it is not in America’s best interest to admit inadmissible statements in court proceedings.

To be fair, I didn’t read the entire affidavit carefully, so I’m relying on the rover’s analysis.  I did skim it though, and most of what I saw was pretty objectionable from an evidentiary standpoint. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

I admire the tenacity you've shown in trying to wishcast a reversal of fortune for Trump, but unless you have a law degree and practice the law as a profession, do you ever stop to think that maybe - just maybe - you might be out of your element debating with people who do practice law as a career? 

Absolutely. I know my limitations.  I'm asking questions to educate myself. 

Where I scratch my head is this is a guy who is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud and he is claiming without a doubt that fraud occured and the response is that there is no merit to this. 

Seems like some people don't want to hear him out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, the rover said:

As a piece of evidence, it’s inadmissible.  You don’t get to submit conclusions as evidence.  You have to show your work.

 

How would he show his work if its classified above what the court is cleared for?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

Absolutely. I know my limitations.  I'm asking questions to educate myself. 

Where I scratch my head is this is a guy who is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud and he is claiming without a doubt that fraud occured and the response is that there is no merit to this. 

Seems like some people don't want to hear him out. 

Does he have an axe to grind?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

Absolutely. I know my limitations.  I'm asking questions to educate myself. 

Where I scratch my head is this is a guy who is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud and he is claiming without a doubt that fraud occured and the response is that there is no merit to this. 

Seems like some people don't want to hear him out. 

You also put an inordinate amount of faith in Sidney Powell and that's been incredibly misplaced.  I just get the sense that you are being incredibly mislead. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, General Malaise said:

You also put an inordinate amount of faith in Sidney Powell and that's been incredibly misplaced.  I just get the sense that you are being incredibly mislead. 

I appreciate your concern. I try to balance optimism and realism. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Where I scratch my head is this is a guy who is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud and he is claiming without a doubt that fraud occured and the response is that there is no merit to this. 

There are tons of these people in the world. Some people are so desperate to be right. So desperate they rationalize speculation as facts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Max Power said:

Absolutely. I know my limitations.  I'm asking questions to educate myself. 

Where I scratch my head is this is a guy who is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud and he is claiming without a doubt that fraud occured and the response is that there is no merit to this. 

Seems like some people don't want to hear him out. 

I’m not familiar with the guy. I have no idea whether or not he is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud. Also, I have no idea whether he has a reputation for veracity.  What I do know, is that he doesn’t seem to understand the Rules of Evidence. And if he is an expert in his field who testifies in cases of this sort, he should. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Max Power said:

How would he show his work if its classified above what the court is cleared for?

Nothing what he did is classified. He used publically available data, most from the NYT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JAA said:

There are tons of these people in the world. Some people are so desperate to be right. So desperate they rationalize speculation as facts.

So your view is that this guy is wrong? And you base that on what?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

I’m not familiar with the guy. I have no idea whether or not he is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud. Also, I have no idea whether he has a reputation for veracity.  What I do know, is that he doesn’t seem to understand the Rules of Evidence. And if he is an expert in his field who testifies in cases of this sort, he should. 

https://cybersummitusa.com/speaker/keshavarz-nia-navid/

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Bios like that can be misleading, but I have to concede that on its face, it is very impressive. Which makes it even more inexplicable that he wouldn’t expend the effort to consult with an attorney on what statements are proper to include in an affidavit. I know lawyers like to pretend they’re all smart and everything, but it’s actually pretty basic stuff. 

Edit: To clarify that it was a declaration, not an affidavit.

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Here is some data for you on the Dr and his company Black Key Solutions:

https://www.manta.com/c/mhk266c/black-key-solutions-llc
 

Goid luck finding a website or his linked in profile or his published works. 

BTW - his company is approved to bid for defense contracts ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Bios like that can be misleading, but I have to concede that on its face, it is very impressive. Which makes it even more inexplicable that he wouldn’t expend the effort to consult with an attorney on what statements are proper to include in an affidavit. I know lawyers like to pretend they’re all smart and everything, but it’s actually pretty basic stuff. 

Edit: To clarify that it was a declaration, not an affidavit. Still a sworn statement. 

Actually - his profile is not impressive at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Absolutely. I know my limitations.  I'm asking questions to educate myself. 

Where I scratch my head is this is a guy who is a top expert in the field of cyber fraud and he is claiming without a doubt that fraud occured and the response is that there is no merit to this. 

Seems like some people don't want to hear him out. 

Did you read the affidavit?  He’s not saying anything without a doubt and isn’t claiming to have reviewed any actual data.  His argument is basically that the election didn’t go the way he expected so there must be fraud.  It’s a completely unprofessional and irresponsible declaration based on conclusions without factual support.  There is nothing in it that could assist a trier of fact.  It’s just conspiracy theories and conclusions.  No court would consider it as evidence.   

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bigbottom said:
17 minutes ago, JAA said:

BTW - his company is approved to bid for defense contracts ...

Apparently not lucrative ones with $148k in annual revenues. 

He’s got got a really nice house so chances are he scored 1 or 2 lucrative deals and is ... interviewing ... for his next one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2020 at 2:56 PM, BoerumHill said:

Dr NKN had no access to any DV machines used in the 2020 election. He has, however, detected some anomalies.

I don’t know, folks, sounds like this could be huge. What day does the Electoral College  convene? 14th or 15th? Just hope there’s still time...

 

https://hereistheevidence.com/

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, GordonGekko said:

been coming here since the 80s

Let’s take one example of “evidence.”

40,000 dead people voted

My goodness! That’s alarming. Where did that number come from?

Well, bc they checked a voter in their 80s online, then search for an obituary. MATCH? Bingo, voter fraud.

#### you not, first one I looked up, lady’s name was June Smith. You’re not gonna believe this, but there’s a June Smith who lives only 352 miles away who died 13 years ago!!!!

U N L E A S H the K R A K E N

Just for giggles I checked my aunt and uncle in Harrisburg. Also fraudulent dead voters!! Sum#####. I feel so awful, I’m supposed to meet their son later this month for takeout lunch. I can’t believe I’m the one who has to tell him both his folks have passed away. His dads apparently been dead for 15 years.

No judgement, but I’m beginning to suspect Uncle Ralph and Cousin Joe were not as close as they wanted everyone to believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...