Possible Election Fraud in Progress

[Tony Stark]

Great news! One thing to mention here is that the state legislatures have the final say if they want it, on the electors that get sent. Certifications by Governors or Secretaries of State, take the backseat if the legislature so desires.

One thing to mention here is that that is false.

 

[exGOPer]

Great news! One thing to mention here is that the state legislatures have the final say if they want it, on the electors that get sent. Certifications by Governors or Secretaries of State, take the backseat if the legislature so desires.

One Trumptard State Rep is not the entire legislature.

Keep your hopes up though, Biden needs to keep winning every day.

 

[BeautifulStranger]

Courts didn't stay the PA certification because the judge did not allow discovery and thus no evidence was allowed to be presented. The Giuliani strategy on the court side is to get this moved as quickly as possible to The Supreme Court, so the lower courts are likely helping him, not hurting him.

Actually, you really want to get stuff taken care of in the lower courts if possible. By the time a case gets to the Supreme Court, the potential scope of a case is reduced, possibly fatally so. SCOTUS is made up of a good number of Textualists and Constitutionalists who are going to demand solid evidence from the plaintiff before considering relief, just like most courts would. Also consider these are more experienced judges than average and who often had notable careers as attorneys. They will not entertain hearing a weak case, regardless of the political affiliation of the plantiff.

Quite frankly, looking at the number of cases voluntarily withdrawn by the Trump Campaign and the lack of information in regards to adverse rulings suggests disorganization or worse, which is not a cause for confidence. Especially if the Trump Administration requests relief beyond the scope SCOTUS was intended for in normal circumstances. Trump Campaign arguments that we are not in normal circumstances has to be extraordinarily compelling for there to be even a chance SCOTUS would even consider taking on an expanded role. The preceeding is my non-lawyer opinion only. Again, given my perceptions of the competence of Trump’s legal team so far, I see no cause for excessive celebration, to put it mildly, with getting SCOTUS involved.

 

[WeToddDid2]

That's not true, And you can not produces any evidence of such. Just saying it is true is not evidence. But you're a fool, and fools are fools because they have lost touch with their fallibility.

If it were true, courts would have stayed the PA certification. But they didn't, and what does that tell you? Nothing of course. But to those who recognize their own fallibility, it immediately tells them there is no truth in those reports.

You are the last person on this board that should be commenting on anything to do with evidence.

 

[smallfil]

Courts didn't stay the PA certification because the judge did not allow discovery and thus no evidence was allowed to be presented. The Giuliani strategy on the court side is to get this moved as quickly as possible to The Supreme Court, so the lower courts are likely helping him, not hurting him.

Unfortunately, they have to go thru the lower courts and appeals courts before the lawsuits can be appealed to the US Supreme Court. Too many biased, extreme liberal judges in the lower courts. Only the US Supreme Court should be handling issues of massive election fraud. This is way too important to be ignored.

 

[exGOPer]

You are the last person on this board that should be commenting on anything to do with evidence.

Whatever happened to your post about Biden getting indicted?

 

[exGOPer]

Unfortunately, they have to go thru the lower courts and appeals courts before the lawsuits can be appealed to the US Supreme Court. Too many biased, extreme liberal judges in the lower courts. Only the US Supreme Court should be handling issues of massive election fraud. This is way too important to be ignored.

Three Republican judges including one Trump appointee threw out the case but nice try there, coper.

 

[BeautifulStranger]

Three Republican judges including one Trump appointee threw out the case but nice try there, coper.

So it fair to say Republican judges are willing to rule against their own party’s political interests under certain conditions, right?

Would it be also fair to say that should the US Supreme Court justices rule in Trump’s favor it would be because of the merits of the case and not political affiliation?

 

[exGOPer]

So it fair to say Republican judges are willing to rule against their own party’s political interests under certain conditions, right?

Would it be also fair to say that should the US Supreme Court justices rule in Trump’s favor it would be because of the merits of the case and not political affiliation?

When you present zero evidence in courts, what could a judge do? All the 'evidence' you guys keep posting are just accusations, there is literally no evidence for any of the claims.

"OMG SERVER CRASHED"

"THERE WAS A RAID IN GERMANY"

"ANALYSIS SAY BIDEN COULD NOT HAVE GOT VOTES"


This is not evidence, these are claims and speculation, not even a Trump appointee would accept it as one.

 

[easymon1]

Ha ha ha. You've posted a lot of dumb stuff. The ET Politics Forum specializes in dumb stuff. But now, with that remark, you've even surpassed yourself.

common sense
have a bite,lol.
http://www.tathasta.com/2020/11/horowitz-new-analysis-shows-biden.html