BOOM! 3rd Circuit Tosses Trump PA Lawsuit - "Voters, not Lawyers, Choose the President"

[jc456]

Sure, the evidence

There is none.

The courts have said that.

Trump's own legal team has said that.

Read the thread.

Will let scotus tell us

 

[jc456]

the record is virtually empty of facts

So it wasn't the cases themselves, but the evidence that was thrown out by Deomocrat judges.

Wrong.

There was no ‘evidence’ to begin with; that's why the cases are devoid of merit and being dismissed.

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

 

[Toro]

Will let scotus tell us

And when they reject it, what will be your response?

 

[Toro]

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

Except that Trump's team does not introduce this "evidence" in court.

So no, there isn't plenty of evidence.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Last stop on the way to the SCOTUS.

We'll see.

There's some problems you should know about.

The appeal that was just struck down wasn't even about the facts of the case. It was actually appealing a denial of a motion for Giuliani to amend his complaint.

That means, at best, the most that Giuliani and Trump can hope for is that SCOTUS referees that denial and allows Giuliani to amend his complaint which puts it all the way back down at the trial judge to actually hear the case. Any decision that actually matters would have to go through the trial judge, then appeals, then SCOTUS.

And yet again – the case won’t be heard by the Supreme Court because the district court and appellate court will be in agreement; there won’t be anything for the High Court to ‘review.’

Sure, the evidence

Also wrong.

The Court can’t ‘review’ that which doesn’t exist.

 

[justinacolmena]

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

As is suppression of the evidence in court.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Read the thread

I have.

It's my thread.

And again, you need something to appeal.

Yep, ifnoung evidence is usually why

we found powell's proof-reader.

 

[jc456]

Will let scotus tell us

And when they reject it, what will be your response?

Every option was exercised, and ignoring voter suppression isn’t a good thing, and cheating would be accepted. Sad. But you still believe Russia Russia. And you’re still a hypocrite

 

[Toro]

Every option was exercised, and ignoring voter suppression isn’t a good thing, and cheating would be accepted. Sad. But you still believe Russia Russia

Everything you said in that post is completely irrelevant to the decision by the PA SC.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Sure, the evidence

There is none.

The courts have said that.

Trump's own legal team has said that.

Read the thread.

Will let scotus tell us

Sorry, this isn’t 2000 – a partisan Republican Supreme Court isn’t going award you the WH this time contrary to the will of the majority of the people.

The current Supreme Court is just as partisan and Republican – but not so blind as to cross certain lines which would destroy the Republic and our democratic institutions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

As is suppression of the evidence in court.

lol

You can’t ‘suppress’ that which does not exist.

 

[Toro]

Sorry, this isn’t 2000 – a partisan Republican Supreme Court isn’t going award you the WH this time contrary to the will of the majority of the people.

The 2000 SCOTUS decision was rooted in law.

None of today's allegations are.

They're just allegations drummed up by Newsmax/OAN/QAnon

 

[meaner gene]

And yet again – the case won’t be heard by the Supreme Court because the district court and appellate court will be in agreement; there won’t be anything for the High Court to ‘review.’

It's too late for the cases to be "heard" by the supreme court. But the court may issue a per curium order to have the case reheard in the lower court.

Similar to when they rejected Trumps "presidential privilege" claim against The NY DA's subpoena. They rejected Trumps claim, and send the case back to the original court to start over again.

 

[gtopa1]

The Court cases are playing out in a most interesting manner. I am interested to see them come to their conclusion though I doubt that anything other than a proper investigation will get all the evidence of Voter Fraud. The real question is: was there enough to turn the election??

Greg

 

[L.K.Eder]

the record is virtually empty of facts

So it wasn't the cases themselves, but the evidence that was thrown out by Deomocrat judges.

Wrong.

There was no ‘evidence’ to begin with; that's why the cases are devoid of merit and being dismissed.

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

nice. trumptard is concerned about voter suppression. that's a riot.

 

[meaner gene]

There was no ‘evidence’ to begin with; that's why the cases are devoid of merit and being dismissed.

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

Trumps lawyers have repeatedly told the judges, that their cases aren't "fraud" cases.

 

[AceRothstein]

I do wonder about the intelligence of the trumpers parroting these bogus "steal" theories. When will it dawn on these types that its all a load of bollox ?

They are fully invested at this point. This is what happens when you make supporting a politician part of your identity.

 

[meaner gene]

Plenty of evidence, ignoring it doesn’t mean there is none. Voter suppression is fraud

Except that Trump's team does not introduce this "evidence" in court.

So no, there isn't plenty of evidence.

This is like when Trump held a press conference about handing over his assets to his family to control, and showed stacks and stacks of manila folders piled on a desk.

Reporters weren't allowed to look at them, and they most likely contained nothing but reams of blank paper.

Trump thought that was evidence too.

 

[meaner gene]

The Court cases are playing out in a most interesting manner. I am interested to see them come to their conclusion though I doubt that anything other than a proper investigation will get all the evidence of Voter Fraud. The real question is: was there enough to turn the election??

Greg

There wasn't even enough evidence to throw out the 500 ballots they were requesting be thrown out in one of their cases. Their request to throw out a states election certification would require 1,000 times as much evidence.

 

[justinacolmena]

nice. trumptard is concerned about voter suppression. that's a riot.

I'm sure the Dems will riot over that, as they have been doing all along for most of this year in Portland, Seattle, and New York among other anarchist jurisdictions.