Can't Wendy Bell do better any than this?
That was a rhetorical
question, of course. As I've been debunking her for a while I have the
answer: No, she can't. She can not do any better than this.
This morning, Wendy posted this on her FB page:
Let's get the old business out of the way, Wendy. Chiropractor Nepute has been debunked a number of times. He ruined his medical credibility was gone long long ago. Were you to take a look at the tag FB left on your "talk" you'd see this:
Do quinine and zinc prevent COVID-19, and will Schweppes Tonic Water help? No, neither are true: A chiropractor in St. Louis posted a video in which he touted a quinine and zinc combination as a preventative measure for coronavirus. He also claimed Schweppes Tonic Water contains quinine and will prevent COVID-19. Both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization have stated that there is no cure or vaccine for coronavirus.
This was from last April. Nepute gets flagged by Facebook (and YouTube, for that matter) because he's been spreading COVID-19 misinformation for
a while. Covid misinformation hurts people and probably has killed a few of
them. That is, I suppose, what they're afraid of.
You should be so proud of yourself to add the name "Wendy Bell" into that deplorable mix. So so proud.
Anyway - I see you've
moved onto/returned to a golden oldie: election misinformation.
I'm a fighter, too. So let's do this.
Here is your first board of bullshit:
What makes debunking Wendy Bell so easy (and I probably shouldn't give it away but here goes) is that she's very specific with her numbers. For example:
1,823,148 Mail-in ballots out.
Now how many pages on the interwebs can there possibly be regarding Pennsylvania
election results and that specific number? How easy is it to find
any of them?
This page, for example. Here's the set-up:
Echoing President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated allegations of widespread electoral fraud, Mastriano tweeted an image purportedly showing “Pennsylvania official votes (@11/24 8 PM)” broken down by candidate and vote method. The text below reads: “Pennsylvania reports having mailed out 1,823,148 ballots, of which 1,462,302 were returned. Yet total mail-in voters number 2,589,242? From where did the extra 1,126,940 votes come?”
(You'll note that the source of the number
is the treason-adjacent State Senator Doug Mastriano. Huh. Interesting.)
But take a look at that! Wendy's numbers right there in a Reuters Fact-check from December 1, 2020.
And this is what they found 6 months ago, Wendy:
The posts’ figures for 1,823,148 mailed out and 1,462,302 mail-in ballots returned correspond with Pennsylvania’s data for this year’s primary elections, held on June 2, 2020.
And their verdict:
Mixing numbers from the 2020 primary and general elections, this claim that there were 1,126,940 “extra” Pennsylvania mail-in votes counted in the general election is false.
Facts are stubborn things, Wendy Bell. Isn't this embarrassing for you? Once an accomplished journalist caught using old debunked information by a guy sitting at his kitchen table working on his second cup of coffee?
Then there's this part:
21,000 confirmed dead people voted
Really, Wendy? Confirmed?
This was fact-checked
last November.:
[T]he claim is misleading. It’s based on a lawsuit filed by a conservative organization called the Public Interest Legal Foundation, which regularly brings voting-related lawsuits against states.
The case was filed on Oct. 15, about two weeks before Election Day. It alleged that more than 21,000 voters registered in Pennsylvania were dead and asked that the court order the state to remove them from the rolls before the election.
The federal judge hearing the case declined to do so.
Instead, Judge John Jones III cited PILF’s questionable methodology in developing its purported list of ineligible voters, its decision to file the suit at the “eleventh hour,” and the fact that Pennsylvania’s system for stripping deceased voters from the rolls appears to work.
So, not confirmed. How did you miss this, Wendy?
How much more embarrassment do you feel right now? That's two very big blunders on your badass BS board, isn't it Bubala?
Let's take a look at the second big ass badass board of BS:
Would this be the same "Douglas Frank" that's been given a "Pants on Fire" verdict by Politifact for doing this exact same thing in Michigan?
(Spoilers: YES, it is!)
This is how wrong he was in Michigan:
David Becker, founder and executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, called the allegations in the pleading "fantastical."
In an email to PolitiFact Michigan, Becker explained that such a conspiracy would have had to be carried out by thousands of people and leave behind a mountain of evidence: meddling with the voter file, extra ballots that couldn’t be explained, voters who tried to vote but couldn’t because someone else had cast their ballots and audits confirming tabulators were tampered.
"There is literally zero evidence of any conspiracy, involving thousands of people, in any state," including Michigan, Becker wrote.
So if it was not just wrong but "pants on fire" wrong in Michigan, why would he try anyplace else?
Did you know he's been peddling the same BS in Colorado?
With
similar results:
Dr. Douglas G Frank has been giving presentations claiming he’s uncovered an algorithm that can precisely replicate turnout in each of Colorado’s counties during the 2020 election. Unfortunately, every single one of the underlying data points he presents is wrong. He may as well be analyzing March Madness scores for all the relevance his data has to the Colorado Election.
Wendy, if your mathematician, frankly, has been shown to be wrong in Michigan AND Colorado, why would you think he's right in Pennsylvania?
Wendy, surely you can think of better ways to spend your time. Perhaps reading some George Will? William F Buckley? Irving Kristol or Gertrude Himmelfarb?
Do those names mean anything to you?
