• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Allegations of Fraud in 2020 US Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
dudalb said:
You are arguing with somebody who buys into the image of Trump as someone who Always Wins.
Click to expand...

Ah yes like how he lead the AFL to defeat the NFL, not in ratings or existing, but in court for the grand sum of $1. A true Trumpian victory that.
 
Bubba said:
No surprise:
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be.

Trump has been attacking the integrity of the elections since mid 2016. He never acknowledges anything that contradicts him. Whether it be 2016 election, crowd sizes, muslims in NJ cheering the twin trade tragedy, the Central Park 5 or the recent election. Trump is either nuts or he's lying. I'm going with lying.
 
So 2 things I am hearing:

The Penn State (or Commonwealth?) Supreme Court just rejected another Trump appeal.

And the SCOTUS has declined to review the court ruling that Pennsylvania can accept late arriving ballots.
 
Again SCOTUS has been remarkably consistent in their "We aren't going to muck around with how the states, on a technical/procedural level, can run their elections" opinion.

They'll (potentially) step in in cases of actual voter fraud or suppression, but this kind of penny-ante "Ballots have to be postmarked by 10 days before the election, but what if a voter is on an airplane crossing the international dateline and then the ballot falls into a timewarp..." kind of nonsense they aren't going to touch.
 
I've heard that the SCOTUS might still take up the Pennsylvania case, but only after everything is certified. There is no way they are going to say that "voters who followed the rules don't count if we decide later that the rules are wrong"
 
turingtest said:
I'm not sure that, for the really hard-core CTist/Trumpist, there are any differentiated stages- it's all one big red-faced ball of "nuh-uh!!!!"
Click to expand...

But she caught me on the counter (It wasn't me)
Saw me bangin' on the sofa (It wasn't me)
I even had her in the shower (It wasn't me)
She even caught me on camera (It wasn't me)
She saw the marks on my shoulder (It wasn't me)
Heard the words that I told her (It wasn't me)
Heard the screams get louder (It wasn't me)
 
Bubba said:
Some people understand it is not over until it is over.


This sounds like one of those pretending it is over before it is over:





Whatever.

Trump believes the election was stolen.

Can you see him giving up??

Get back to us when it is actually over.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's possible that a football team that scored a touchdown with 2 minutes left in the 4th quarter to cut the deficit to 49-10 could recover 6 consecutive onside kicks and complete 6 consecutive "hail Mary's" for touchdowns, but I consider the game to be over and turn the TV off.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Yes, it's possible that a football team that scored a touchdown with 2 minutes left in the 4th quarter to cut the deficit to 49-10 could recover 6 consecutive onside kicks and complete 6 consecutive "hail Mary's" for touchdowns, but I consider the game to be over and turn the TV off.
Click to expand...

And if the opposing team did manage to score 39 points in two minutes it would not be the kind of thing you had to challenge the play or demand a review or go to the tapes on, it would be kind of obvious.

At this point Trump was down by 39 points a 2 minutes, we all watched the last two minutes and say that nothing happened, and he's still demanding reviews and replays.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
They amended it to get around the Judges "With Prejudice" ruling, but it will just be thrown out again....
Click to expand...

It's actually very confusing. The original appeal was only on the Leave of Amendment, where the judge ruled he wasn't going to let them amend their arguments again. Remember, they already did amend their argument once, when Rudy came on, and threw out a whole bunch of stuff. Then when they went to court, they tried claiming they still wanted to be able to add them back in, and the judge was like, no. So they appealed.

But that was all they appealed. The most significant thing they didn't appeal was the ruling that they didn't actually have standing to bring the case in the first place. So they put in an amended appeal that said, "this doesn't mean we aren't appealing the other stuff, too."

The county has responded with, that's not how it works. If you want to appeal the ruling, appeal the thing. You can't appeal bits and pieces at different times. If you don't appeal the finding of fact now, you can't come back and do it later.

This is just them throwing everything at the wall until something sticks. How about this? NO. Well what if we claim this? NO. But what about this? NO

Keep trying that until you get a yes. The case is never done.

Next try that with the appeal.

It's desperation, and not a good legal strategy (why wouldn't you bring your best argument forward first?)
 
Bubba said:
Did someone say Sidney Powell is behaving like a military lawyer dealing with treason?

For justice's sake, we all hope it is true that High Court Judges were moved to new positions.

If so, Constitutional Law will be implemented in corrupt States.

Now how many States won’t certify their results?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/circuitassignments.aspx
Click to expand...

Nice timing! :thumbsup: Yours dovetails nicely with mine. :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom