If it wasn't for mail in voting being "liberalized" Trump probably wins. Trumpanzees contend votes were illegally cast and/or counted. But they can't prove it. They have "suspicions." And their suspicions are more valid than others. Because of Trump. Everyone was against him.
They cannot prove it because the evidence is being held from discovery. Any honest person knows they have never gotten the chance. That leaves a lot of people out here.
Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.thefederalist.com
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
The opening post called you out before you even saw the thread. You have failed to demonstrate that you even read and understood the opening post and article.Not stolen. You’re all just pathetic sore losers. That kind of immaturity and childishness goes with being republican.Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
Payback is gonna be SUCH a fucking BITCH!!!
Every rural county in America is about to gain at least 1,000,000 new voters each.
And when the bitching starts, the response will be.....
SORE LOSERS
BASELESS
And we are going to laugh and shake our huge dicks at these motherfuckers!!!
Not everyone was against the formerrt guy, only seven million more voters than were for him.
Lol, the article was too deep for you to read. The opening post called you out before you even came across the thread. You will NEVER be able to dispute the article that this thread is about, since you could never read and understand it.The opening post called you out before you even saw the thread. You have failed to demonstrate that you even read and understood the opening post and article.Not stolen. You’re all just pathetic sore losers. That kind of immaturity and childishness goes with being republican.Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
The opening post was a lie. The writer of the article has the IQ of a gnat.
Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims
The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.
The linked article is quite detailed and assumes that the reader has both a three-digit IQ and an attention span greater than that of a common housefly, but it outlines and clearly explains the phoniness of the "no evidence" and "80 courts have spoken" Narratives about this past Presidential election.
There are ultimately three or four different lines of legitimate inquiry - all involving apparent election wrongdoing - in which various courts chose, either through cowardice (USSC) or political expediency (PA Supreme Court), to reject cases and possible serious inquiries into activities that very easily could have reversed the electoral results in enough states to shift the ultimate result to President Trump.
The main question quickly shifts from "why is 40% of the electorate convinced that the election was fixed?" to "Why is there not an armed rebellion over this electoral travesty?"
I don't expect the Leftists here to read this; they are blinded by whatever-it-is, but the facts are what they are, and this election was stolen. Sorry.
lol
poor emotional snowflake
I saw chaos because the cops failed,
it's actually very simple. an election worker claimed foul and submitted an affidavit that a judge threw out. Why did the judge throw that affidavit out? The worker was not allowed to bring the suspect ballot to court because it is illegal for people to remove ballots without a warrant. So, want to know, there you go. no other reason to deny the challenge through the courts, that was proper procedure intentionally denied. Can't be for any other reason except to hide the fraud. You're welcome.
