• artyom@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    the DOJ is saying it simply wants to “go out, knock on doors, potentially interview these ballot workers and poll workers.”

    The govt will never send people to your home to knock on your door for a fun chat. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. So say nothing. You have nothing to gain by talking to them.

    If you are or know one of these workers, don’t open the door, demand to see a warrant. If they don’t have one, tell them to go away and ignore then. Actually that applies to everyone, but especially these workers.

    • frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      They will probably just break in anyway, and knowing how bad they are at investigating, they will probably break into homes where the workers don’t even live anymore.

      • artyom@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        They may do that but if they do, nothing they find will be admissible in court. If you let them in, that doesn’t apply.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          True, but that’s assuming the proper use of the justice system is the intent. No. The goal here is obviously to promote fear for political gain (literally the definition of terrorism). They want to ensure these poll workers, and others like them, know the Trump administration will come after them. Only the ones who support the regime are safe.

          • artyom@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Listen, I get it, our criminal justice system is anything but just. But these are things you can do that will probably protect you. So maybe stop arguing against it.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I don’t see where I argued against it. It’s still the smart thing to do, but it’s not going to prevent their goal. They couldn’t care less about getting an actual conviction. Yeah, make sure their case fails to protect yourself, but their goal is only to make sure you suffer, and that doesn’t require a conviction.

    • Fishnoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Put a homemade claymore under your porch with a remote detonator… To protect against bears. Just definitely make sure you don’t get confused and hit the button on accident when a bunch of armed masked strangers are at your door…

    • Fishnoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      3 days ago

      He knows he lost. He’s just trying to replace the truth with a lie. That’s why Jack Smith said he had a 100% case against him and then he wasn’t allowed to pursue it. Trump has admitted to multiple people multiple times in private and in small groups that he knows he lost. That means that he was lying and inciting violence in a mob because of a lie which is incredibly illegal.

      There’s going to be a bloodbath after the midterms. The question is whether it’ll be a good one or a bad one

        • Asafum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          I do. It’s after the midterms that I have no clue about.

          What happens when Congress refuses to accept a change in leadership? What happens when Trump says “no, it was rigged. It doesn’t count. Only the Republicans who won count.” Who forces Johnson to step down?

          I think we will carry out the midterms and either the Republicans win or the Republicans “won.”

          • Ænima@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            I hope we make it so obvious and overwhelming in votes that any attempt to change election results, or deny them, will be so overtly obvious that even deep red places turn blue.

  • tacoplease@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 days ago

    I surmise that Georgia 2020 was rigged for Thwump to win, but he lost cause he’s a dumb loser.

    That’s why he’s getting biblical looking for election fraud cause he was too dumb to cheat right.

    • obvs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      Exactly.

      I am sure that he is ACTUALLY sure that Biden cheated, specifically because I am sure that TRUMP cheated and that in his mind, his reasoning is “If I cheated and I still lost, there’s no way the other guy didn’t cheat.”

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Something something “lawfare”.

    Weird how I don’t hear all those radical right wing snowflakes bitching about “lawfare” saying shit about any of this stuff.

  • osanna@lemmy.vg
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    When trump wins: nope. Not vote rigging

    When trump loses: OH MY GOD THERES SO MUCH VOTE RIGGING.

  • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’ve heard they used something call al-gebra to count the votes. More like Al-Jazeera! They should all be tried for terrorism!