ADVERTISEMENT

Rudi layes out the case!!

dad_in_tx said:
We shall see. If you were watching the hearing on election issue just now you might have some different opinions.
Click to expand...
I have it on tuning in and out.

Bottom line is Republicans would not have filed this suit if they won the state. The Act and its respective language isn't new information and didn't target any person or party unfairly.

You can't come to a federal court of equity seeking relief only when you lose when you knew there was an problem, but let it play out only to discover it didn't end up working to your benefit then cry foul.

Additionally, if we look to cases like Purcell v Gonzalez in '06, the conservative SCOTUS maintained that you need to make your case early and not wait until the eve of an election lest you disrupt the orderly process of elections by changing rules that could affect outcomes. The fact that the relief being sought is throwing out all mail-ins after the certification process has been completed goes against that ruling even more.
 
I'm eager for Giuliani and Ellis to go say the exact same things I'm listening to in the Pennsylvania public forum inside of a courtroom, under oath and in front of a judge.
 
bcg_2006 said:
I have it on tuning in and out.

Bottom line is Republicans would not have filed this suit if they won the state. The Act and its respective language isn't new information and didn't target any person or party unfairly.

You can't come to a federal court of equity seeking relief only when you lose when you knew there was an problem, but let it play out only to discover it didn't end up working to your benefit then cry foul.

Additionally, if we look to cases like Purcell v Gonzalez in '06, the conservative SCOTUS maintained that you need to make your case early and not wait until the eve of an election lest you disrupt the orderly process of elections by changing rules that could affect outcomes. The fact that the relief being sought is throwing out all mail-ins after the certification process has been completed goes against that ruling even more.
Click to expand...
Their point is they would have won the state fairly if the processes described under statue were followed. So, yeah, exactly they would not be filing.

we shall see how this plays out in court.

I sure as hell don’t have any faith in the count though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darterbury
RedshirtAg said:
She is good at finding big fish to take money from. It’ll be interesting how many millions she will make off hard working Americans who have made donations based on lies. This stuff pisses me off.
Click to expand...
It will infinitely less than the hundreds of millions that the sleazy liberal attorneys have made blocking freedom of information
 
Longneck 80 said:
Did 600,000 more Pennsylvania mail in votes get returned than were issued or not? This should be simple to answer.

If true, is there any reasonable explanation that doesn't include stuffing ballot boxes?
Click to expand...
Sounds like the state had request for 3 million mail in ballots and processed about 2 million. Sounds like a wild claim.
 
RedshirtAg said:
Sounds like the state had request for 3 million mail in ballots and processed about 2 million. Sounds like a wild claim.
Click to expand...
I believe the 600,000 number was Philadelphia only not Statewide. The claim is that the irregularities are Philadelphia and Allegheny counties and maybe a couple others but most of the state did not have the irregularities.
 
84aggiect said:
It will infinitely less than the hundreds of millions that the sleazy liberal attorneys have made blocking freedom of information
Click to expand...
If you think liberal attorneys block freedom of information you have no clue how the courts work at all. Not even a tiny bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bioaggie
Aggie98nHouston said:
Is there any part of our democracy you do have faith in? Or just anything you like?
Click to expand...
What kind of question is that? I have great respect and faith in the process in 53 of our States and Territories ( excluding PA, MI, WI, and NV) and with respect to PA ONLY Philadelphia and Pittsburgh do I question. Why? Well the facts presented and my experience over the years. Philadelphia particularly is ( and has been for as long as I can remember ) always dirty.

but thank you so much for your concern.
 
dad_in_tx said:
What kind of question is that? I have great respect and faith in the process in 53 of our States and Territories ( excluding PA, MI, WI, and NV) and with respect to PA ONLY Philadelphia and Pittsburgh do I question. Why? Well the facts presented and my experience over the years. Philadelphia particularly is ( and has been for as long as I can remember ) always dirty.

but thank you so much for your concern.
Click to expand...
Any concern in states that Trump won? Seems like Trump and lawyers have you punting on states that likely did zero wrong.

Philly people suck but doubt any voter fraud exist.
 
Aggie98nHouston said:
If you think liberal attorneys block freedom of information you have no clue how the courts work at all. Not even a tiny bit.
Click to expand...
I'm talking News, Social Media, Courts, Congress. let's use 1 simple example... Hillary Clinton declaring I do not recall 13,500 in 1 single case. If you think the slimey, sleazy, liberal lawyers and bought and paid for judges don't do everything in their power to keep true information from the general public, you need to wake up
 
Third circuit has it. This was written by a Trump appointee and all the judges are republican appointees. But again - I’m sure this is irrelevant to Dad.

“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are seri-
ous. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”

 
It’s also interesting to see the difference between what these blow hards say at random lawn care businesses vs what they say in court when they have to be semi honest.

“The Campaign’s claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically chal- lenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters.”
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bioaggie
Aggie98nHouston said:
It’s also interesting to see the difference between what these blow hards say at random lawn care businesses vs what they say in court when they have to be semi honest.

“The Campaign’s claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically chal- lenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters.”
Click to expand...

First, this will be appealed to SCOTUS, we knew it would ultimately be decided there didn’t we?

To your claim of the number of contested ballots, I think the total number is much higher than 81,000 but for purposes of argument let’s say that’s true. Any fraud amount of ballots is bad and could serve as a basis for legislative reform. I’d personally like the Universal Mail in ballots gone. Obviously that’s a huge issue and maybe some good could come out of this. There’s still a lot of time between now and 12/20 when the Electors vote.

We shall see!
 
Last edited:
So the number of votes in question in the state of Pa is around 1.2 Million. Here’s a posting from their own SOS with comments that explain.



they have sworn Affidavits which to me is evidence. I don’t particularly want to parse legalese with Houston because in addition to being biased he’s not interested in getting the answer.

oh! And BTW the PA Senate is acting on the following resolution.

www.legis.state.pa.us

Senate Co-Sponsorship Memoranda

www.legis.state.pa.us
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: darterbury
dad_in_tx said:
First, this will be appealed to SCOTUS, we knew it would ultimately be decided there didn’t we?

To your claim of the number of contested ballots, I think the total number is much higher than 81,000 but for purposes of argument let’s say that’s true. Any fraud amount of ballots is bad and could serve as a basis for legislative reform. I’d personally like the Universal Mail in ballots gone. Obviously that’s a huge issue and maybe some good could come out of this. There’s still a lot of time between now and 12/20 when the Electors vote.

We shall see!
Click to expand...
The contested number isn’t my number. It’s Trump’s number. That’s the point I am making. What his team is telling their base is not even close to the arguments made in court because they’d get disbarred for making them. They are telling people like you objective lies in hopes of casting doubt for reasons I am not sure about other than have America not believe in our system anymore. And sadly it’s working.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bcg_2006
There were voting anomalies in the Beto/Cruz 2018 race?? This is interesting. Also explains why it was so close.

If you believed Russian interference but poopoo this, you may be a hippicrit.

From Rudy today:

 
  • Like
Reactions: BDB99 and dad_in_tx
Today's testimony should change his mind. Luckily the Supreme Court isn't hiding like Barr.

Whistleblowers are too be taken seriously no?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BDB99
darterbury said:
Today's testimony should change his mind. Luckily the Supreme Court isn't hiding like Barr.

Whistleblowers are too be taken seriously no?
Click to expand...

Sure whistleblowers should be heard, but SCOTUS doesn't grant a writ of certiorari for cases in the court of public opinion.
 
BDB99 said:
Crickets from the lawyers paid to monitor social media and Alex Jones
Click to expand...
If you are attempting to reference me, you must have missed my previous posts. I posted the Trump appointee third circuit opinion, agreed upon with two other republican appointees, calling Trump’s lawsuits utter bullshit. You should give it a read. The difference in what is argued in court vs what his team says in press conferences or law care businesses should be enough to make you shake your head.
 
Aggie98nHouston said:
Gotta be a rhino, right?

lawandcrime.com

Trump Campaign Lawyers Lash Out at Bill Barr | Law & Crime

While the president and his self-dubbed “elite strike force” legal team responded by lashing out at Barr, others noted that losing one of the president’s most loyal cabinet members felled one of the final pillars of Trump’s false election victory claims.
lawandcrime.com lawandcrime.com
Click to expand...
Well hot damn. Let’s speed the nomination up to next week then. Bill said he hasn’t seen anything yet. Why stick to protocol when we now have an office of the president elect so we can tell the guy who just had the election stolen for him that all is still good. He’s going to be there for a little while until the people that put him there are done with him. It’s sickening how democrats are perfectly fine with what happened in Philadelphia, Detroit, Milwaukee and other democrat cities but hey. That’s democrats. They want to fvck over the citizens of this country however they can. Glad they have you
 
  • Like
Reactions: darterbury
I’ll be excited when the dust settles on all this and if trump gets fvcked over by our system like he has been for 4-5 years he starts a 3rd party. Fvck the republicans and democrats are scum
 
  • Love
Reactions: darterbury
Aggie98nHouston said:
Gotta be a rhino, right?

lawandcrime.com

Trump Campaign Lawyers Lash Out at Bill Barr | Law & Crime

While the president and his self-dubbed “elite strike force” legal team responded by lashing out at Barr, others noted that losing one of the president’s most loyal cabinet members felled one of the final pillars of Trump’s false election victory claims.
lawandcrime.com lawandcrime.com
Click to expand...
Actually, he said that he has not, to date, seen evidence of systematic fraud. This seemly simple statement is a marvel of no-speak. First, factually, the DOJ has yet to open an investigation which would result in them potentially’seeing’ evidence of fraud. Secondly, he didn’t say anything about evidence of wrongdoing that may not be fraud, as in ballot stuffing.

So, it’s not a blanket statement.

I’m waiting for someone in the land of judges to take up the case for investigation (actually the DOJ could do thiis) . I frankly find it suspicions that there ISN’T a line to investigate the charges. Especially with the number of sworn statements. They would be easy to refute by a audit of the existing logs required by law.

what are you afraid of?
 
  • Like
Reactions: darterbury
Here's another woman handing out a usb drive, which appears to corroborate witness testimony that usb drives with 50k votes for Biden were handed out to workers.

But of course some people don't even think these things are worth looking into.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2th_doc and darterbury
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

thesassman

ABC and Stephanopoulos forced to pay $15M to Trump

Replies
1
Views
158
Politics Board
wick
W
Mark Passwaters
  • Sticky

Note from Elko's press conference

Replies
51
Views
3K
Northgate
superag1000
S
Colt_Seavers

Bowl Season betting thread

Replies
10
Views
343
Northgate
barseven7
barseven7
Elgot

Family compound for sale

Replies
55
Views
2K
Northgate
taylorwh777
taylorwh777
FletchW

UCF-Iowa State

Replies
3
Views
366
Northgate
Pyro97
Pyro97
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back