House Dems draw the line: No bipartisan cooperation with Republicans who questioned the election

[BlindBoo]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

 

[jc456]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s illegal. We have laws for a reason right?

just like scotus doesn’t create laws like roe vs wade

 

[BlindBoo]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s illegal. We have laws for a reason right?

just like scotus doesn’t create laws like roe vs wade

The courts didn't views that change as illegal. Fact is those ballots were not included in the states totals when they announced Biden the winner anyway.

 

[MeBelle]

The Texas Governor changes the dates on Mail In voting without the legislature's approval. We need to invalidate the entire state results too. Texas can't even conduct a paper recount.

Why?

By Texas law, the Gov has the right to do such.

Other states have different laws.

 

[BlindBoo]

The Texas Governor changes the dates on Mail In voting without the legislature's approval. We need to invalidate the entire state results too. Texas can't even conduct a paper recount.

Why?

By Texas law, the Gov has the right to do such.

Other states have different laws.

Texas Republicans disagreed and took it to court for resolution, like they did in Pa and other swing states. Which of course was the proper way to proceed.

Texas Republicans sue to stop Gov. Greg Abbott's extension of early voting period during the pandemic

State party Chair Allen West, Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller and members of the Texas Legislature were among those who filed the suit against Abbott.

www.texastribune.org

 

[jc456]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s illegal. We have laws for a reason right?

just like scotus doesn’t create laws like roe vs wade

The courts didn't views that change as illegal. Fact is those ballots were not included in the states totals when they announced Biden the winner anyway.

how do you know, they said they weren't going to hear it. they didn't see any evidence. they decided to let the cheat stand. doesn't mean it was legal. because they didn't, I can claim cheat and steal until they do.

 

[MeBelle]

The people who questioned the election are brainwashed Trump cult fools.

What group of heathens do you call that questioned the 2016 election?

 

[AFrench2]

The people who questioned the election are brainwashed Trump cult fools.

What group of heathens do you call that questioned the 2016 election?

Never happened.

EDIT: Or...do you have a link perhaps to a story about it?

 

[WTH_Progs?]

I read bend over for your raping or we'll use it against you.

Says a lot about the OP to support this, am I right?

 

[BlindBoo]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s illegal. We have laws for a reason right?

just like scotus doesn’t create laws like roe vs wade

The courts didn't views that change as illegal. Fact is those ballots were not included in the states totals when they announced Biden the winner anyway.

how do you know, they said they weren't going to hear it. they didn't see any evidence. they decided to let the cheat stand. doesn't mean it was legal. because they didn't, I can claim cheat and steal until they do.

The courts decided to let the deadline change stand, but those ballots were sequestered and as of a few weeks ago had not been includes in the totals in Pa.

 

[jc456]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s illegal. We have laws for a reason right?

just like scotus doesn’t create laws like roe vs wade

The courts didn't views that change as illegal. Fact is those ballots were not included in the states totals when they announced Biden the winner anyway.

how do you know, they said they weren't going to hear it. they didn't see any evidence. they decided to let the cheat stand. doesn't mean it was legal. because they didn't, I can claim cheat and steal until they do.

The courts decided to let the deadline change stand, but those ballots were sequestered and as of a few weeks ago had not been includes in the totals in Pa.

Why would they sequester just those ballots if they were legal?

 

[BlindBoo]

When will you answer question of whether Pennsylvania and other swing states acted illegally in letting
state functionaries make changes in election law that only state legislators are legally capable of making?

What changes to the laws?

Extension of legal date

U.S. Supreme Court won’t hear Pa. mail-ballot deadline case as election challenges meet dead end

The decisions deny a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

www.inquirer.com

The U.S. Supreme Court said Monday that it won’t hear several challenges to Pennsylvania’s 2020 election — including two appeals of the state’s mail-ballot deadline extension — denying a Republican attempt to severely limit courts’ ability to oversee how elections are run.

The decision not to hear the legal challenges brought by top Republican state lawmakers and the state GOP ends litigation that prevented Pennsylvania from counting 10,000 mail ballots that arrived in the three days after Election Day and had remained in legal limbo. But one final legal challenge to those ballots remains before the high court, and the Pennsylvania Department of State isn’t counting them until that case is resolved. If counted, they would likely extend President Joe Biden’s 80,000-vote victory in the state.

The decisions show how the campaign to challenge and undermine the election results by Donald Trump and his allies outlasted even his presidency, and are only now close to coming to an end after meeting near-universal defeat in state and federal courts.

The decisions also set back a Republican push to significantly shift the election law landscape by essentially shutting out courts from making changes to election procedures.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s illegal. We have laws for a reason right?

just like scotus doesn’t create laws like roe vs wade

The courts didn't views that change as illegal. Fact is those ballots were not included in the states totals when they announced Biden the winner anyway.

how do you know, they said they weren't going to hear it. they didn't see any evidence. they decided to let the cheat stand. doesn't mean it was legal. because they didn't, I can claim cheat and steal until they do.

The courts decided to let the deadline change stand, but those ballots were sequestered and as of a few weeks ago had not been includes in the totals in Pa.

Why would they sequester just those ballots if they were legal?

In order to protect the rights of the accusers if they chose to appeal the case after the election and the appeals court reversed the decision.

 

[jc456]

In order to protect the rights of the accusers if they chose to appeal the case after the election and the appeals court reversed the decision

Wasn’t that done? You just went circular

 

[TeeDub]

About damn time the Democrats show some spine against these deplorable Republicans in Congress...

Sure fool. just like the dems did when Bush beat Gore and Trump was elected. By the way there was fraudulent voting. When I was young I was a member of the Young Democrats of Cook County (Chicago). they cheat in EVERY election. Acorn was shut down but they also broke off in splinter groups. Stop being stupid, Marcel.

 

[BlindBoo]

In order to protect the rights of the accusers if they chose to appeal the case after the election and the appeals court reversed the decision

Wasn’t that done? You just went circular

The appeals process did not overturn the original decision.

 

[jc456]

In order to protect the rights of the accusers if they chose to appeal the case after the election and the appeals court reversed the decision

Wasn’t that done? You just went circular

The appeals process did not overturn the original decision.

They didn’t hear it

 

[BlindBoo]

In order to protect the rights of the accusers if they chose to appeal the case after the election and the appeals court reversed the decision

Wasn’t that done? You just went circular

The appeals process did not overturn the original decision.

They didn’t hear it

The SC decided to let the lower court ruling stand.

 

[Doc7505]

Get rid of the stupid talk free filibuster.. then fix the rest..

Democrats want to change the rules once again.... Moving the goal post in their favor is their rule.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Democrats want to change the rules once again.... Moving the goal post in their favor is their rule.

Do nothing conservatives want to do nothing but go home and bitch about liberals at taxpayer expense.

 

[AFrench2]

About damn time the Democrats show some spine against these deplorable Republicans in Congress...

Sure fool. just like the dems did when Bush beat Gore and Trump was elected. By the way there was fraudulent voting. When I was young I was a member of the Young Democrats of Cook County (Chicago). they cheat in EVERY election. Acorn was shut down but they also broke off in splinter groups. Stop being stupid, Marcel.

The kid who got ACORN shut down testified to faking the videos, and the kid (James O'Keefe) got in trouble.