I just submitted a shitload of evidence. Thanks.
*VOTER FRAUD MEGATHREAD*
- Thread starter _glaciers
- Start date
You guys are still on stage 1 of 7 in the grieving process. Usually people progress quicker through the stages.
No, whats ironic is that they use the video of a leftist melting down to show how the right is melting down.
You guys are still on stage 1 of 7 in the grieving process. Usually people progress quicker through the stages.
They probably let out a nasty fart before they walked out
With the federal courts dismissing for time frame and jurisdictional matters, I wonder how any election result can ever be challenged. It takes time to gather evidence and build a case and this time is normally granted to plaintiffs. It is very rare that plaintiffs have all of the evidence gathered within days of filing.
But the election timeframes have been used by judges to create a new standard where the plaintiffs must have all of the evidence within days of the election. This is an impossible standard to meet. Therefore, no matter how much evidence exists, no one will be able to successfully challenge an election result based on fraud.
Couple that with the glaring and obvious insecurities of our election processes, and our elections have no verifiable integrity. We are just hoping that everyone has good intentions.
But the election timeframes have been used by judges to create a new standard where the plaintiffs must have all of the evidence within days of the election. This is an impossible standard to meet. Therefore, no matter how much evidence exists, no one will be able to successfully challenge an election result based on fraud.
Couple that with the glaring and obvious insecurities of our election processes, and our elections have no verifiable integrity. We are just hoping that everyone has good intentions.
It’s unfortunate but in the USA you have to come armed with the evidence first before making the wild accusations and claims. Rather than making the wild accusations and claims months ago and now frantically searching to uncover any evidence. And no most of the cases being dismissed are due to claim unsubstantiated by evidence, not because of the time frame.
What our Resident Trumpsters had to say during Trump's Impeachment:
What our Resident Trumpsters had to say after the Presidential Elections:
What our Resident Trumpsters had to say after the Presidential Elections:
Why would conservatives see anything in the impeachment hearing? It was just an exercise in futility.What our Resident Trumpsters had to say during Trump's Impeachment:
What our Resident Trumpsters had to say after the Presidential Elections:
What our Resident Trumpsters had to say during Trump's Impeachment:
What our Resident Trumpsters had to say after the Presidential Elections:
i'm embarrassed for you
That's exactly why Sargent Schultz from Hogan's Heroes captures that moment in time perfectly.
I agree. The Senate trial was a joke.
You're still mad over one 2nd hand account of a phone call that may or may not have taken place.
Meanwhile, you're ignoring the 100's of whistleblowers coming forward.
Brainwashed MAGAt poll watchers unfamiliar with the vote counting process are not exactly what I would call “hundreds of whistleblowers”. But YMMV.
Ha! I see what you're trying to do.
The problem is that in a real trial with an impartial jury, Trump would have been convicted based on the evidence presented. While in the aftermath of the presidential election, Trump's "evidence" of 'rampant voter fraud' isn't serious enough to even sniff the attention of GOP-appointed judges before being routinely dismissed.
No, that's not how it works in the USA. Not in civil court and not in criminal court either. In civil court, you file your complaint and then you depose witnesses and gather evidence. You have some evidence up front but the discovery process is where you gather most of your evidence. Similarly, in criminal court, you arrest and then file charges criminally and then you have time to put your case together.
In no court ever have they required you to have all of your evidence at the time or within days of filing your suit. Good try at gaslighting though.
And, no, most of the cases were dismissed because of many procedural reasons, such as the judge finding that they did not have standing to file, that there was no way to resolve the case before the EC deadline, or that the votes were already certified thus rendering the court impotent to remedy the situation. Sure, the judges railed on in their finding about wild claims and evidence, but their actual findings were procedural and thus pretty much appeal-proof.
Again, though, it takes time to generate evidence of voter fraud and conspiracy. The system doesn't allow the time to investigate it. I don't know what to tell you if you don't see that this is a problem.
Do you have anything to bring to this other than ad hominem gaslighting?
your anger tells me this whole Texas thing has you a little worried.
quite the house of cards you've built isn't it?
The key is the “evidence up front” part. Yes if they had evidence up front that would help.
You don't need evidence to file a complaint. You need them at a dismissal or summary judgement hearing. But you normally are not on some external timeframe such as an election that forces that to be within a few days. The problem is that the justices in these cases are making statements that require a much larger amount of evidence up front in order to file a suit. The type of information that you normally use the legal system with subpoenas and discovery to acquire. To require that before going through the process would be a huge bar to an enormous number of lawsuits.
Think about a valid slip and fall situation. You know the store has a camera system but they have no legal duty to provide that to just any person asking. You need to file suit first which then subjects them to legal constraints and requirements. If you had to have that video of you falling on a neglected situation before filing suit, then all they'd have to do is say "no" to your request and you'd never have a legal recourse.
7 more states have signed on with Texas. This one will likely be heard by the court.
Lol. Crushing loss.
www.cnn.com
Supreme Court rejects Pennsylvania Republicans' attempt to block Biden victory
The Supreme Court on Tuesday denied a request from Pennsylvania Republicans to block certification of the commonwealth's election results, delivering a near fatal blow to the GOP's long-shot bid to invalidate President-elect Joe Biden's victory.
www.cnn.com
Maybe the fourth time will be a charm. It’s like JFK jr flunking the bar again. And again. And again.
www.bbc.com
Georgia declares Biden winner for a third time
After two recounts, Joe Biden is declared to have won Georgia by about 12,000 votes.
www.bbc.com
"the thief counted his wallet 3 times and determined he stole nothing"Maybe the fourth time will be a charm. It’s like JFK jr flunking the bar again. And again. And again.
Georgia declares Biden winner for a third time
After two recounts, Joe Biden is declared to have won Georgia by about 12,000 votes.
The left now has on its 2020 resume...looting, rioting, burning cities, and stealing elections. Not doing real work for sure.
Nothing was stolen. Stop listening to www.loser.com
Last edited:
nah, just getting started.
yalls version of resistance resulted in mass crying/indoctrination on social media. because that's your demographic, those are your workhorses; those who run social media companies and hollywood.
you better hope and pray that the workhorses of the right who are providing you with electricity, gas, homes, food, the ability to structure/comprehend your financial situation, etc don't decide to do the same. you'll become the third world country you crave to be.
also, you'll never be a real woman.
Latest posts
-
-
UCF fb -2.5 pt favorite over WVU (opening line on DraftKings)- Latest: Knight of Pegasus
-
-
-
