Possible Election Fraud in Progress

It's because of the Democrats ...
It's because of the RINO's ...
It's because of Bush's Republican Judges ...

Is it just me, or is there a pattern with this cult?
 
userque said:
It's because of the Democrats ...
It's because of the RINO's ...
It's because of Bush's Republican Judges ...

Is it just me, or is there a pattern with this cult?
More...

If it is always about the others, reality is that it is about YOU. That's my life experience.
 
BeautifulStranger said:
The key part of the article linked below is “The blistering opinion from a panel of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, all three of whom were nominated by Republican presidents, said that the Trump campaign's "claims have no merit.". The George Bush family is strongly anti-Trump and known to be extremely partisan during George Bush sr’s and jr’s Presidency except for the raising of taxes in during Bush sr’s term, appointed a lot of judges on the Third Circuit of appeals. I would love to know the names of these judges and see who appointed them.

https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news...appeal-of-pennsylvania-election-case/2371460/



Also potentially worthy of note is an article suggesting the appeal in PA was “Too narrow” and thus seemingly precluding immediate involvement of the US Supreme Court. The article below also suggests Trump Campaign attorneys has been less than competent in handling their appeals case.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-electi...s-current-appeal-simply-cannot-get-him-there/
More...

The key part is there is no evidence because there is no "election fraud".
 
I looked up the biography of Judge Stephanos Bibas. Damn, he has an impressive resume. He was also a member of the Federalist until 2017, a source of most of Trump appointees. The Federalist advocates textualist and orginalist interpretation of the US Constitution, which may be suggestive of how the impending Trump Campaign appeal to SCOTUS might go.

It seems the incompetence of Trump’s attorneys rather than the potential merits of their case has led to their repeated losses in court.

“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here,” Judge Stephanos Bibas wrote in a 3-0 decision from the US Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.

We still have not heard from witnesses who have signed affidavits, under penalty of purjury, that consists of poll watchers, electronic voting system experts, and election officials.

The other judges on the panel were Chief Judge D. Brooks Smith and Judge Michael Chagares, were nominated by former president George W. Bush.

The Trump campaign vows to go to the US Supreme Court on this decision, but I see no reason to expect a favorable outcome for the Trump Administration on this effort.

I wonder if senior members of both the Democrat and Republican Parties reached a behind the scenes agreement to get rid of Trump by any means necessary because of mental stability and competence concerns?
 
Nine_Ender said:
The key part is there is no evidence because there is no "election fraud".
More...

The judge(s) in question did not say there was no election fraud. They merely indicated Trump’s attorneys failed to make a sufficient case in order to justify court action to be taken.
 
BeautifulStranger said:
The judge(s) in question did not say there was no election fraud. They merely indicated Trump’s attorneys failed to make a sufficient case in order to justify court action to be taken.
More...
What the Leftist idiots on the board don't realize is that in these cases, the judges are dismissing with allowing discovery. You're not going to win any cases when the judges don't allow discovery---in fact, you can't even get evidence submitted. I can only surmise that these cases are being dismissed out of hand simply to expedite getting the cases up the line to higher courts.
 
Buy1Sell2 said:
What the Leftist idiots on the board don't realize is that in these cases, the judges are dismissing with allowing discovery. You're not going to win any cases when the judges don't allow discovery---in fact, you can't even get evidence submitted. I can only surmise that these cases are being dismissed out of hand simply to expedite getting the cases up the line to higher courts.
More...

I did not look through the whole PA hearing video. I and others should do so to have a feel for what was presented. Is it a matter of the courts not allowing evidence to be presented as a possible part of a bipartisan consipacy theory against Trump or are suppossedly skilled attorneys simply screwing up?

I don’t see how Trump can survive without the support of his party, even assuming significant election fraud did indeed occur.

The evidence of election fraud is based on 40 witnesses who have signed affidavits. I am not sure whether this witness count covers all swing states in question or just in PA. Either way, in a world where people, such as social media profile deleting Christina Blasey Ford get their day in court against future SCOTUS appointee Brett Kavanaugh, I hope the US Presidential election fraud witnesses get their day in court as well. Especially on an issue as important of the integrity of the US elections.

Edit: Christina Blasey Ford’s “Day in court” was her giving testimony in front of Congress.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top