Haha, a while ago, one of the Pedes called him the "resident", lmao!!!

😊

Pedes, I always tell you, beware of the BUT!!! Here's a fine example. Sounds just like an MSM shill, defending MSM propaganda, where it's not what they say, it's how they say it. You cannot convict her, she told no lie! And there is no elephant in the room!!!

I did watch it, unfortunately OP only gave us a screen shot. If she didn't use the exact wording of "to be fair", she certainly implied that somehow the lawyer was being petty because the amount of illegal evidence tampering was very minor. Get your eagle eyes and watch it again yourself and parse and analyze every word. But if you don't want to see the truth, nothing is going to convince you.

You have to recognize the psychological tricks of language. For example, she first states, "To be fair". In the minds of the viewers, the idea is planted that the lawyer isn't being fair. She insinuates that he is making a mountain out of a molehill. Then she uses language that does not at all reflect the seriousness of the evidence tampering. Thirdly, her entire communication plants the idea in the viewer's mind, that only two characters were changed, being such a tiny amount of evidence tampering should somehow be excusable when it absolutely is not excusable. No amount of evidence tampering is excusable. Any amount of evidence tampering is a big deal, and should be examined with a microscope. Evidence tampering is a crime!

I hope this breakdown shows you and others how easily MSM fools us. And how very sad, and outraged actually, we analytical types are, at the disgusting wiles the MSM uses on our less analytical American brothers and sisters!!!

And how difficult it is to remedy, without being able to sit down with them and watch MSM and break down for them, the subliminal psychological tricks being used on them. Breaks our hearts really, and fills us with anger at these travesties of communication!!!

She described the evidence tampering, in terms that implied that it was miniscule, minor and insignificant; when in fact it was quite impactful. Also, her downplaying of the evidence tampering created the impression that the lawyer was being petty about such a little thing, when actually any act of evidence tampering is egregiousgregious!!

That's like Fox's new catch phrase "fair and balanced". As soon as you hear that, you know it's going to be anything but!

We've been getting a lot of these "to be fairs" on p.w, every time I see that, it sounds the shill alarm!!!

Source please?

Just trying to help young ones who might feel guilty about having feelings of pride, slothfulness, or something else that they are told is a DEADLY sin!

The way we use the word "pride" doesn't always mean sin in the biblical sense. Just don't think that you are better than others.

And please don't think of yourself badly if you sin, it just means you're making a mistake and you need to change that.

First time I saw him! Love his energy and joy. He has a new Granny fan!!!

No! Sour Pickles. Very apt, because she is always so sour, and she does kinda look like a pickle.

It's just an obstacle thrown in our course. We had to get past it, now it's Geotus' move!

OP I would also like a bit easier access to the source. I don't doubt the veracity, I just would like to see more than just the 14 lines in the screenshot.

A link would be ideal. Any other Pedes have it?

Haha ya, it's the "Rosetta stone" of election fraud.

And yes that shifted decimal point is curious. Doesn't seem consistent with the rest of the data. I haven't really analyzed it, but it seems like the algorithm was not consistent in the way it calculated "other votes". I noticed that some of the "other votes" values are negative.

Edit: transposition error?

Oh I should tell you, I think generations are often counted as 15 years. But I don't really know for sure.

Officially, it's 2010 but I think it might have been a little earlier.

Algorithm.

How does it make any sense, to create a record with an accurate bottom line, but the rest of the data is useless fiction?

Edit: I think I might answer my own question, if I'm correct - the bottom line is also fiction.

Actually, one person split their vote 3 ways 🤔

Also how does it make any sense, to create a record with an accurate bottom line, but the rest of the data is useless fiction?

Edit: I think I might answer my own question, if I'm correct - the bottom line is also fiction.

No Pede,

.659 + .322 + .19 = 1 vote.

This math shows the percentages of votes that were allocated to each candidate. I hope that's clear?

Edit: for our autists, there's another problem here. Notice how some of the "other vote" values are negative, (by a lot)? Isn't anybody asking, how can a vote total value be negative?

We have one more weapon!!! Our money, and we must support the patriotic non-profits that are doing what we would do if we could. Pedes we have Gen Z, and now new Gen Alpha, that we must fight for their future!!! A good world to grow up in!

Edit: haha is "fight" a dirty word now? Maybe I should say, work for their future!!!

Yes, and it really is the optimal time to start a new party!!!

We can't win anyway, only deep state-approved candidates will get past Dominion and the Dems. Perfect time. I don't know if Geotus favors this course but I do whole-heartedly!!!