German City Is CIA Remote Hacking Base: 28 States Sent Election Results There

[Eric Arthur Blair]

If your youtube video is such compelling evidence.....why hasn't it been presented in court?

Because you can't ask questions of a YouTube video to clarify legal matters .
Fortunately the person at the center of the video will be representing Donald Trump in
court. Hey! There's a happy coincidence!

 

[Skylar]

If your youtube video is such compelling evidence.....why hasn't it been presented in court?

Because you can't ask questions of a YouTube video to clarify legal matters .
Fortunately the person at the center of the video will be representing Donald Trump in
court. Hey! There's a happy coincidence!

You can't question a document either. Or a voting machine. Or any non-person that is submitted as evidence.

So why hasn't this video been entered?

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You can't question a document either. Or a voting machine. Or any non-person that is submitted as evidence.

So why hasn't this video been entered?

I just told you why. Are you that stupid?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

Yes. Too bad for Biden.

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

 

[Skylar]

You can't question a document either. Or a voting machine. Or any non-person that is submitted as evidence.

So why hasn't this video been entered?

I just told you why. Are you that stupid?

Yeah, but you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. As all sorts of things that can't be cross examined are admitted as evidence.

Documents. Pictures. Videos. Forensic evidence. Phone records. Post it notes. DNA samples. The list is endless.

None of it can be cross examined. And yet its all admissible as evidence if its relevant to the case. Just obliterating your pseudo-legal excuses.

So I ask again, why hasn't your youtube video been submitted as evidence in court if its as compelling as you say?

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

Then what change were you were referring to....were the imaginary kind?

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

Then what change were you were referring to....were the imaginary kind?

how can I explain a change that hasnt happened yet???

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

Then what change were you were referring to....were the imaginary kind?

how can I explain a change that hasnt happened yet???

So the imaginary kind.

Yeah, I'm not going to get mad about your imagination.

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

Then what change were you were referring to....were the imaginary kind?

how can I explain a change that hasnt happened yet???

So the imaginary kind.

Yeah, I'm not going to get mad about your imagination.

its not imaginary of it hasnt happened,,,

 

[Skylar]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

Then what change were you were referring to....were the imaginary kind?

how can I explain a change that hasnt happened yet???

So the imaginary kind.

Yeah, I'm not going to get mad about your imagination.

its not imaginary of it hasnt happened,,,

Then what pray tell, is there for me get mad about?

Remember, my guy won.

 

[progressive hunter]

}

Nothing to see here.

Oh...look at Rudy Giuliani's hair dye running down!


(leftist priorities)

A random blog post on a brand new wordpress blog started in July of 2020....

Vs. the actual election results.

Gee, I wonder which conservatives are going to believe.

the election results havent been determined yet,, and as things progress it seems like trump might win,,

The election results haven't been determined yet.....according to who?

Because every state has released tallies of the ballots cast in their state.

And 'progress'.......you mean like Trump's pennsylvania lawsuit being dismissed with prejudice yesterday by a life long republican judge?

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence

Failure after failure demonstrates neither skill nor success.

according the the constitutional requirements,,,

Then why, pray tell, were conservatives insisting Trurmp had won the day after the election in 2016? Why was Trump invited to the White House the day after that?

Odd, its almost like you use two completely different standards depending on who the winner of the election was?

they were giving their opinion as you are,,,

the facts are the election has yet to be determined,,,

I'll go with the tallies reported by every state of the ballots cast. And leave the 'opinion' nonsense to you are yours.

you will have to wait for those results until after all disputes are resolved,,,

No, I don't. They're available right now.

You simply choose to ignore them because you don't like what they reveal: Biden's victory.

Good luck with that.

now youre back to opinion,,,

I dont ignore what we currently know,, sadly its not that easy,,,

I'm back to the same place I started: the actual tallies reported by the actual states of the actual votes cast in their states.

And you're still back to ignore them.

As I said, good luck with that. The world doesn't disappear just because you close your eyes.

I'm not ignoring them,, I am considering all the aspects of how a president is elected as per the constitution,,

you ignore those at your own peril,,,

Of course you're ignoring them. Again, in 2016 you didn't 'consider all the aspects of how a president is elected per the constitution'.

You insisted Trump won based on the election results.

This time, you ignore those same results.

No thanks. I'll stick with the actual election results over what you imagine.

the actual election results have yet to come in,,,

Nonsense. Every state has reported their tallies. You can look at them right now.

I have looked at them and it looks like biden might win,,

to bad it doesnt end there,,,

The judge in Pennsylvania who dismissed Trump's lawsuit with prejudice (so it can't be amended and resubmitted) may have a different perspective:

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

Shall we add him to the list of folks you have to ignore?

if you say so,, sounds like old news to me,,

You're the one ignoring the election results. I thought this ruling might also make your list of things to pretend don't exist.

youre ignoring the legal process that follows,,,

On the contrary.....I'm citing the legal process that follows:

In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

With prejudice. That's harsh. That means that the request for injunction on the election certification can't be amended and resubmitted.

And Pennsylvania is certifying in about 12 hours or so.

But you can treat all of that like you do the election results....and try to pretend that none of it exists.

you go ahead and focus on that,,, just dont get mad when things change,,

When what changes? By all means....be specific. And show us the evidence of your claims.

As I did when I demonstrated the epic, embarassing failures of Trump's legal efforts to overturn the election results. Or when I cited the actual election results.

how can be specific about what hasnt happened yet???

Then what change were you were referring to....were the imaginary kind?

how can I explain a change that hasnt happened yet???

So the imaginary kind.

Yeah, I'm not going to get mad about your imagination.

its not imaginary of it hasnt happened,,,

Then what pray tell, is there for me get mad about?

Remember, my guy won.

the final results,,,

and as of today there is no winner,,, just a projected winner,,,