Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
your composite link, first case ...went to link for it, in that link found the court case link....Sorry bout that,
1. The amount of, ***(unfounded)*** evidence is monumental.
2. To claim otherwise saying there is no evidence, makes you a *LIAR*.
3. You will regret that.
4. Here Is The Evidence
Regards,
SirJamesofTexas
And he's so popular (the most votes for any candidate in history), that they can't have a public inauguration, are locking down DC, and are putting 25,000 troops on the street to keep order, right????
Why does that look suspicious????
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
Sorry bout that,
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
The problem is you guys didn't have any "evidence". You had a lot of supposition, but no actual evidence.
That's why 60 courts rejected your claims.
I clicked on the link and saw the same nonsense that`s been pushed for 2 months. If a ballot was received on November 4 or 5 and it had a Nov. 3rd postmark it`s a legitimate ballot. If any of that nonsense was valid the Trump appointed judges wouldn`t have thrown the trump lawyers out on their asses. The courts aren`t looking at it because they have legitimate issues to deal with. They are Judges and helping trump steal an election isn`t in their job description.No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
Sorry bout that,
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
The problem is you guys didn't have any "evidence". You had a lot of supposition, but no actual evidence.
That's why 60 courts rejected your claims.
1. Dare yourself to go click on the link in the OP.
2. So much evidence, you are riding the tide of a stolen election, and say, "There is no proof the election was stolen, it was kicked out of court 60 times."
3. The proofs there you need to ask yourself why isn't the courts looking at it?
Regards,
SIrJamesofTexas
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
Sorry when the dismiss the case it is a sure sign that they had no case. Sorry that they did not call and tell you why. Yet courts with conservative majority still shot him down. So those conservative majority judges hate Trump.
So when a number of courts from state level to the supreme court your defense is they hated trump. Sorry hate has nothing to do with it.
The supreme court denial him because the lower court was correct in it judgment but the losers wanted to take to the supreme court. , the justices left intact a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which said the challenge to a state law passed in 2019 came far too late.
It doesn't mean that he had a case it just means that it is too late and too bad. IF they wanted to question the legality of the mail in ballot changes they should have done it before the election instead of waiting after the election. Meaning don't waste our time because of being a cry baby. If you thought the law was invalid then you should have challenged it a year ago.
But , But , But
Arguments were heard by the judges at the lower level and they rejected the arguments of Trump lawyers and ruled in favor of the winners.
That is an explanation that the claims were not court worthy
Weak cases do not need to go thru the whole process. When Trump lawyers are using the coronavirus pandemic as a claim that voting rules were unconstitutional then that is not proving voter fraud. This case did not even make a claim of voter fraud. They just wanted the whole election of that state erased based on constitutional concerns which had already been litigated in the past.
lower courts had ruled that Trump and company lacked legal standing to pursue the case as well as any specific allegation or evidence.
Arizona Supreme Court upholding a lower court's finding that there was no misconduct, fraud or illegal voting in the general election.
at the lower level the court heard testimony and oral arguments, but all the lawyers would prove was a couple of local government mistakes were done
The state supreme court agreed " the challenge failed to present any evidence of misconduct, illegal votes or that biden did not get the most votes. or that there was sufficient error rates that could change the vote. Meaning irregularities have to be sufficient in numbers to show that it caused Trump to lose.
Thus Trump calls the state of Georgia and wants them to find 11,780 votes. Why because Trump lost Georgia by 11,779 vote
Now did what Trump did count as election fraud?
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
Sorry when the dismiss the case it is a sure sign that they had no case. Sorry that they did not call and tell you why. Yet courts with conservative majority still shot him down. So those conservative majority judges hate Trump.
So when a number of courts from state level to the supreme court your defense is they hated trump. Sorry hate has nothing to do with it.
The supreme court denial him because the lower court was correct in it judgment but the losers wanted to take to the supreme court. , the justices left intact a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which said the challenge to a state law passed in 2019 came far too late.
It doesn't mean that he had a case it just means that it is too late and too bad. IF they wanted to question the legality of the mail in ballot changes they should have done it before the election instead of waiting after the election. Meaning don't waste our time because of being a cry baby. If you thought the law was invalid then you should have challenged it a year ago.
But , But , But
Arguments were heard by the judges at the lower level and they rejected the arguments of Trump lawyers and ruled in favor of the winners.
That is an explanation that the claims were not court worthy
Weak cases do not need to go thru the whole process. When Trump lawyers are using the coronavirus pandemic as a claim that voting rules were unconstitutional then that is not proving voter fraud. This case did not even make a claim of voter fraud. They just wanted the whole election of that state erased based on constitutional concerns which had already been litigated in the past.
lower courts had ruled that Trump and company lacked legal standing to pursue the case as well as any specific allegation or evidence.
Arizona Supreme Court upholding a lower court's finding that there was no misconduct, fraud or illegal voting in the general election.
at the lower level the court heard testimony and oral arguments, but all the lawyers would prove was a couple of local government mistakes were done
The state supreme court agreed " the challenge failed to present any evidence of misconduct, illegal votes or that biden did not get the most votes. or that there was sufficient error rates that could change the vote. Meaning irregularities have to be sufficient in numbers to show that it caused Trump to lose.
Thus Trump calls the state of Georgia and wants them to find 11,780 votes. Why because Trump lost Georgia by 11,779 vote
Now did what Trump did count as election fraud?
Sorry I don't do speaking the gibbrish bullshitz you did spoken.
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
Sorry when the dismiss the case it is a sure sign that they had no case. Sorry that they did not call and tell you why. Yet courts with conservative majority still shot him down. So those conservative majority judges hate Trump.
So when a number of courts from state level to the supreme court your defense is they hated trump. Sorry hate has nothing to do with it.
The supreme court denial him because the lower court was correct in it judgment but the losers wanted to take to the supreme court. , the justices left intact a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which said the challenge to a state law passed in 2019 came far too late.
It doesn't mean that he had a case it just means that it is too late and too bad. IF they wanted to question the legality of the mail in ballot changes they should have done it before the election instead of waiting after the election. Meaning don't waste our time because of being a cry baby. If you thought the law was invalid then you should have challenged it a year ago.
But , But , But
Arguments were heard by the judges at the lower level and they rejected the arguments of Trump lawyers and ruled in favor of the winners.
That is an explanation that the claims were not court worthy
Weak cases do not need to go thru the whole process. When Trump lawyers are using the coronavirus pandemic as a claim that voting rules were unconstitutional then that is not proving voter fraud. This case did not even make a claim of voter fraud. They just wanted the whole election of that state erased based on constitutional concerns which had already been litigated in the past.
lower courts had ruled that Trump and company lacked legal standing to pursue the case as well as any specific allegation or evidence.
Arizona Supreme Court upholding a lower court's finding that there was no misconduct, fraud or illegal voting in the general election.
at the lower level the court heard testimony and oral arguments, but all the lawyers would prove was a couple of local government mistakes were done
The state supreme court agreed " the challenge failed to present any evidence of misconduct, illegal votes or that biden did not get the most votes. or that there was sufficient error rates that could change the vote. Meaning irregularities have to be sufficient in numbers to show that it caused Trump to lose.
Thus Trump calls the state of Georgia and wants them to find 11,780 votes. Why because Trump lost Georgia by 11,779 vote
Now did what Trump did count as election fraud?
Sorry I don't do speaking the gibbrish bullshitz you did spoken.
well said but could you repeat it again. because you really didn't provide any evidence of voter fraud that did cost Trump the election.
Yeah Trump has appointed a number of judges. And they still did nothing for him. The supreme court threw his cases out even after appointing two of them along with the other conservatives on the court.And we know why the courts were unfavorable to Trump, it's because he was trying to fix them also (draining the swamp), and you know the courts wanted Trump gone because he was exposing their bullcrap also. I mean look at how bad the leftist judges were, and still are, where as they were and/or still are constantly making idiotic jaw dropping rulings that were steadily destroying this country's faith in the judicial system. Trump recognized the problem, and began fixing that too.My only concern if there is this mountain of evidence why has it not been present in a court of law. Where they would have to provide the mountain of evidence. Instead of posting it on a website as if it is legitimate because they have a web site. Seems to me that it is the same thing that every right wing sources has been saying but now they have a website with a catchy name.
if they have this evidence, Trump has lawyers who would love to use it.
You can only introduce evidence into a court, if and when the court allows for you to do so.
Oh yeah they hated Trump with a passion, but remember how Obama made the USSC justices feel in his disrespectful seating of them, uhhh during some event they had attended of his ?? I think his intent was to immediately break them down spiritually, and show them that he was in charge now. All very vague now, but I can remember it still.
No reasons or explanations to indicate that any of the evidence and testimony was ever considered.
And some still act surprised by the uprising in DC.
Sorry when the dismiss the case it is a sure sign that they had no case. Sorry that they did not call and tell you why. Yet courts with conservative majority still shot him down. So those conservative majority judges hate Trump.
So when a number of courts from state level to the supreme court your defense is they hated trump. Sorry hate has nothing to do with it.
The supreme court denial him because the lower court was correct in it judgment but the losers wanted to take to the supreme court. , the justices left intact a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which said the challenge to a state law passed in 2019 came far too late.
It doesn't mean that he had a case it just means that it is too late and too bad. IF they wanted to question the legality of the mail in ballot changes they should have done it before the election instead of waiting after the election. Meaning don't waste our time because of being a cry baby. If you thought the law was invalid then you should have challenged it a year ago.
But , But , But
Arguments were heard by the judges at the lower level and they rejected the arguments of Trump lawyers and ruled in favor of the winners.
That is an explanation that the claims were not court worthy
Weak cases do not need to go thru the whole process. When Trump lawyers are using the coronavirus pandemic as a claim that voting rules were unconstitutional then that is not proving voter fraud. This case did not even make a claim of voter fraud. They just wanted the whole election of that state erased based on constitutional concerns which had already been litigated in the past.
lower courts had ruled that Trump and company lacked legal standing to pursue the case as well as any specific allegation or evidence.
Arizona Supreme Court upholding a lower court's finding that there was no misconduct, fraud or illegal voting in the general election.
at the lower level the court heard testimony and oral arguments, but all the lawyers would prove was a couple of local government mistakes were done
The state supreme court agreed " the challenge failed to present any evidence of misconduct, illegal votes or that biden did not get the most votes. or that there was sufficient error rates that could change the vote. Meaning irregularities have to be sufficient in numbers to show that it caused Trump to lose.
Thus Trump calls the state of Georgia and wants them to find 11,780 votes. Why because Trump lost Georgia by 11,779 vote
Now did what Trump did count as election fraud?
Sorry I don't do speaking the gibbrish bullshitz you did spoken.
well said but could you repeat it again. because you really didn't provide any evidence of voter fraud that did cost Trump the election.
/iggy
Troll B Gone
nypost.com
1. Dare yourself to go click on the link in the OP.
2. So much evidence, you are riding the tide of a stolen election, and say, "There is no proof the election was stolen, it was kicked out of court 60 times."
3. The proofs there you need to ask yourself why isn't the courts looking at it?
1. Dare yourself to go click on the link in the OP.
2. So much evidence, you are riding the tide of a stolen election, and say, "There is no proof the election was stolen, it was kicked out of court 60 times."
3. The proofs there you need to ask yourself why isn't the courts looking at it?
Hey, stupid, if there was so much "evidence", then why wasn't it presented in court? Oh, yeah, because if you lie in court, it's called Perjury, and you go to jail for that.
You little Moon Bat shitheads all know that the Democrats stole the Presidential and Senate elections the same as we Americans do. You know the that unverified mail in ballots were fraudulently created in the swing Democrat controlled districts. The evidence for that is overwhelming. If you somehow don't know then you are dumber than a door knob.
There was no audit to prove that the ballots were legit, despite the overwhelming evidence. The Democrats and the Swamp resisted having an audit of the contested district and got away with it. The greatest thievery in the history of the Republic. In fact it was a thievery of the Republic.
It will destroy this country but you stupid greedy Moon Bats don't give a shit because you assholes think you are entitled to have your welfare.
