In Pennsylvania, a batch of 600,000 votes went 99.5% for Biden

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,541
Reaction score
26,566
Points
2,180
The only thing the Supreme Court can do, is to reinstate the dismissed case, and remand it back to the original court. They can't make any injunctive relief, because there is not enough evidence on the record for them to make that judgement.
While I think you right.... You don't actually know that. Nor do I. Go to trial and see. *shrugs*
Yep, that's what the Supreme Court is for. Let's just go there and see if this shit flies. <-- sarcasm
Why are all you turds trying so hard to obstruct the legal process if you are so confident about Biden's case?
What the fuck are you talking about?
Nobody is trying to obstruct Trump's efforts.

It's the JUDGES who are either dismissing or denying his cases, you stupid fucking idiot.
Spare us.
 

Dogbiscuit

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2020
Messages
2,257
Reaction score
2,757
Points
1,903

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
37,092
Reaction score
5,247
Points
1,140
You need to go get yourself a new detector, did you actually watch that video?

600,000 was the total of batches throughout the night.

Wtf is it with rightwingers and total inability to do some basic critical listening and fact checking?

I watched the video before I posted it.

I stand by what I said.
Are you claiming it’s true just because you heard trumps attorneys say it’s true? Here is a little tip. Stick to the stuff they say in court and not the stuff they say in public statements. There is a stark difference and there is a reason for that.
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,104
Reaction score
3,543
Points
290
The only thing the Supreme Court can do, is to reinstate the dismissed case, and remand it back to the original court. They can't make any injunctive relief, because there is not enough evidence on the record for them to make that judgement.
While I think you right.... You don't actually know that. Nor do I. Go to trial and see. *shrugs*
Yep, that's what the Supreme Court is for. Let's just go there and see if this shit flies. <-- sarcasm
Why are all you turds trying so hard to obstruct the legal process if you are so confident about Biden's case?
I'm not obstructing anything,. The courts are throwing out Trump's cases right and left for lack of evidence.
You're on this forum specifically to stop Trump's lawsuits. Who do you think you're kidding?
I am? How does being on this forum accomplish anything like that? I want Trump's team to file any pertinent law suits. Instead all they do is file frivolous lawsuits that get thrown out and waste everyone's time.
 

Blaine Sweeter

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Messages
4,313
Reaction score
3,467
Points
1,930
For all the dumb asses, litigation takes time. You want these cases brought to trial in 3 days and if not.....

WHY HAVEN'T YOU PRESENTED ANY EVIDENCE!!!


Fucking idiots.
34 judges have thrown these respective cases out for lack of evidence and/or the cases were deemed frivolous.
You know more about this than 34 judges?
Link(s)? Show me what cases they were and give me the opinions of the Court and reasoning for dismissing.

It's what you're asking me to do. You do it.
Glady, you lazy-assed mo'fo: In Pennsylvania, a batch of 600,000 votes went 99.5% for Biden
 

HaShev

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,164
Reaction score
2,590
Points
265
In Pennsylvania, in the middle of the night, after they stopped counting votes and sent everyone home, they found a batch of 600,000 votes, and 99.5% of them were for Biden.

I think I'm detecting just a wee little bit of fraud here.

The mainstream media hasn't reported this, as far as I'm aware.

Nope. Nothing to see here folks. This is not the voting fraud you are looking for. Move along. Move along.

It's so easy to catch them because they are so greedy even in their cheating they can't throw a few bones the other way and you'll notice they forgot to throw a few third and forth party votes in with their ballot stuffing *L* in PA green party and Libertarian votes vanished only in the suspicious piles, but existed in small percentages in other counts. Even the occasional satirical write in vote disappears, you know the Daffy Duck or Mr Clean vote vanishes in ballot stuffing.
You know something is wrong in Philly if Doctor J. Or the Philly Phanatic gets no votes. *L*
 

meaner gene

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
6,916
Reaction score
3,547
Points
930
Do you really expect him to read those posts.


I provided a link to the Trump team election challenges and you ignored it in favor of demonstrating your fantastic ability to misunderstand almost everything you read.
Yes, I did ignore it. List the ones that the Trump campaign filed.
Wait until he asks you to post transcripts of the case in order to prove it.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,541
Reaction score
26,566
Points
2,180
Until an affidavit is submitted to a court of law, there is no penalty for lying on it.

And so far, I don't know of any affidavits being accepted by a federal court in any of the lawsuits Trump filed.
That's your argument, "they haven't been submitted yet?"
The lawyers knew a great many of the affidavits people filed contained provable lies. Those affidavits were not submitted to court.

Those affidavits containing vague accusations (not provable either way) were the one's submitted.
Horseshit.
Why hasn't the Trump team presented any decent, believable examples of voter fraud in court? No time like the present.
They're too busy cleaning up Rudy Giuliani's hair dye.
And I was told there are some jobs Americans would not do.
You were told that by the same douchebags you voted for.
Yeah, little did they know how low you guys grovel.

Maybe take a different path, you keep walking into it.
You don't know the meaning of the word "grovel," obviously. Thanks for proving that you're an idiot.
No, groveling Trump supporters sounds about right.
Yes, to a retard it sounds right.
Neat. What you should be doing is sticking to the point of the thread, ain't nobody got team to roll in the mud with you.
"Team [sic] to roll in the mud?" "groveling" isn't the subject. You're killing me with this machine gun style stupidity.
Yeah, you're completely derailing the thread. I provided a link to the Trump team election challenges and you ignored it in favor of demonstrating your fantastic ability to misunderstand almost everything you read.
Yes, I did ignore it. List the ones that the Trump campaign filed.
You're going to ask for something that I already provided and you admit you ignored? Do you need to be spoon fed ya' big baby?

Ok, if that's what you want, baby.



Pennsylvania
Multiple legal battles over the Keystone State’s election laws were underway well before Election Day, but this week, the Trump campaign upped the ante. Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said in an interview that “there has been a lot of noise about litigation” but it has had “zero material impact” on the electoral process. “The count has continued. Legal votes are being tallied and soon the commonwealth will respect the will of the people and certify a vote,” he said. Since Tuesday, the campaign has filed at least five separate lawsuits, with mixed results:

1. To compel Philadelphia election officials to stop counting ballots.

A federal judge dismissed the request.

2. To compel state election officials to allow Trump campaign officials closer observation of the counting process.

A state judge ruled in the campaign’s favor, allowing campaign officials to observe the Philadelphia process from a six foot distance. Philadelphia election officials appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court. On Nov. 9, the court agreed to hear the case. On Nov. 15, the state’s supreme court overturned the lower court’s ruling, ruling that the original rules the campaign was fighting were justified.

Levitt says this ruling will likely affect the pace of the count, rather the outcome. “Imagine a gymnasium, with observers lining the walls: to let the observers get closer, they’ve got to move the count closer to the walls and not be counting in the center,” he writes. Since people can no longer count in the center of the gym, “the count is going to move more slowly.”

3. To compel Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and all 67 counties to impose an earlier date for voters to show proof of identification if it was not on their initial ballots.

On November 12, the presiding judge ruled in favor of the campaign, writing that ballots cast by voters who had not provided supplemental identification by Nov. 9 could not be counted. Previously, that judge had ordered all counties to segregate those ballots while weighing whether to count them. The Secretary of State’s office did not respond to a query about the number of ballots pertinent to this order. Shapiro said on Twitter the ruling impacted “very few ballots.”

Local Republicans filed a separate suit against Boockvar in state court, alleging she subverted state law when she issued guidance telling voters with deficiencies on their mail-in ballots to cast provisional ballots, and trying to prevent those provisional ballots from being counted. A state judge denied that request, but ordered officials to segregate provisional ballots from voters who submitted deficient mail-in ballots before election day.

4. To compel the Montgomery County Board of Elections to stop counting mail-in-ballots

The campaign and Republican National Committee filed suit to halt the process of counting mail-in ballots in Montgomery County, one of the counties in suburban Philadelphia, alleging that the board of elections was counting 592 ballots that had not been placed in secrecy envelopes and was therefore not complying with requirements. Pennsylvania election data shows Montgomery county overwhelmingly voted for Biden.

On November 13, a judge denied the request from the campaign, and ordered that the county could count the ballots. At an oral argument for the case on November 10, the lawyer representing the campaign, Jonathan S. Goldstein, told the judge they were not accusing the county administrators or the voters casting these ballots of voter fraud.

5. To intervene in an already existing dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether ballots the state received after 8 p.m. on Election Day should count.

The litigation is ongoing. Some legal experts are skeptical SCOTUS will take the case, while others say that even if the Justice do, their ruling is unlikely to change the outcome of the Presidential election. Pennsylvania election officials have said there are fewer than 10,000 ballots in this category, and Trump currently trails Biden by over 45,000 votes.

“I think that the court is going to be very hesitant to involve itself in the process in the most politically contentious context possible,” says Michael Dimino, an election law expert at Widener University in Pennsylvania. Joshua Geltzer, executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law, notes that the number of ballots that may fall in this category “appears increasingly irrelevant to the election outcome given the sheer vote numbers in that state regardless of those ballots.”

The backstory: After Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court extended the ballot receipt deadline to Nov. 6, state Republicans twice appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The first time they were unsuccessful, and the second time the court declined to expedite the decision before the election, but left open the possibility of hearing it afterwards. On Nov. 6, Supreme Court Justice Alito, in response to a motion from Pennsylvania Republicans, ordered state election officials to segregate any ballots that arrived after election day. State officials had already ordered counties to segregate any ballots that arrived after Election Day, likely anticipating a future challenge.

6. To stop Boockvar and seven individual counties from certifying the election results

The campaign filed a 105 page federal lawsuit on Nov. 9 alleging state officials created a “two tiered” system to ensure Biden would win the state by allowing vote-by mail – a violation the constitution’s equal protection clause – and that the results should consequently not be certified. The seven counties named as defendants in the lawsuit – Allegheny, Centre, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Northampton and Philadelphia – all voted for Biden.

Litigation is still ongoing, and the Democratic National Committee has filed a motion to intervene. Legal experts have said it is unlikely the case will succeed. Hasen wrote in the Atlantic that the claims are “ludicrous.” On Nov. 13, two attorneys with the law firm Porter Wright Morris & Arthur withdrew from representing the campaign. On Nov. 15, the campaign filed an amended, narrowed, complaint that focused solely on voters that had been allowed to correct deficiencies on their ballots. On Nov. 16, the second group of attorneys representing the campaign withdrew from the case.

7. To stop Bucks County from counting mail-in ballots

The campaign had previously filed a lawsuit in state court on election day to stop Bucks County – a suburban county near Philadelphia where Biden narrowly won – from counting mail-in ballots, but the lawsuit was dismissed. The campaign filed another complaint on Nov. 8, alleging that the county accepted over 2,200 defective ballots. A conference is scheduled for November 17.

It is unclear if the majority of these ballots were cast for Biden or Trump, although Democrats in the state overwhelmingly voted by mail this year. But even if the court rules in favor of the campaign and throws out these ballots, it is unlikely to change the outcome. Biden leads Trump by 16,000 votes in the county, according to unofficial results.

Nevada
With Trump narrowly trailing Biden in the state, the Trump campaign has backed two cases to impact the counting of ballots:

1. To impose an injunction on the automated signature-verification machines used in Clark County as ballots continue to be counted.

A federal judge rejected the request on Nov. 6, ruling that federal judges should not be involved in state election administration and there is no evidence Clark County is doing anything unlawful.

The backstory: The Trump campaign held a press conference on Nov. 5 introducing Jill Stokey, a Nevada voter who claimed that when she tried to cast a ballot, she was told someone had already cast a mail-in ballot in her name. She alleged that the signature verification technology used in Clark County, the most populous county in the state, enabled someone to cast a mail-in ballot in her name. Her lawsuit asserted, without evidence, that “lax procedures for authenticating mail ballots” had resulted in “over 3,000 instances of ineligible individuals casting ballots.”

Aaron Ford, Nevada’s Attorney General, called Stokey’s allegations “absurd.” “While the Attorney General’s Office normally does not comment on pending litigation, I feel compelled to dispel the misinformation being circulated to undermine the public’s trust in our election,” he said in a statement.

2. To compel state election officials to allow the public closer observation at a Clark County ballot-counting facility.

The Trump campaign, Republican National Committee, and a plaintiff, Fred Krause, filed a lawsuit before election day in state court seeking to halt the counting process in Clark County until they could observe the process.

A district judge rejected the lawsuit, ruling they lacked standing to bring the claims and had no evidence to back up their arguments. The plaintiffs appealed to the state Supreme Court, which accepted the request to expedite the case, but denied the request for immediate relief. In a November 5 order, the State Supreme Court said the campaign and state Republicans had reached a settlement. According to local news, the settlement included expanding observation access, so that all counting tables would be visible to the public. On November 10, the campaign officially filed to dismiss the suit.

Michigan
While the Associated Press called Michigan for Biden on Nov. 4, the Trump campaign and Republicans have continued to file lawsuits attempting, unsuccessfully, to stop the state ballot count. Biden currently leads Trump by approximately 148,000 votes. The state has seen at least three cases since Election Day:

1. To halt the counting of absentee ballots, on the grounds that campaign officials had not been given access to observe the process as required by state law.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the campaign’s request on Nov. 6.

2. To halt the certification of election results in Detroit, Michigan’s largest city and a Democratic stronghold.

Judge Timothy Kenny denied the motion for injunctive relief on Nov. 6, saying there was no evidence that oversight procedures had not been followed.

“Chief Judge Kenny’s quick decision mirrors a decision yesterday by Court of Claims Judge Stephens – specifically, that, once again, the allegations are mere speculation,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s Press Secretary Ryan Jarvi said in a statement. “The swift, clear and decisive opinion should put to rest the meritless claims that have been made in Michigan and other states around the country.”

The backstory: The case was not brought by the Trump campaign, but by a conservative group, the Election Integrity Fund, and sought to stop election workers in Detroit from “curing” absentee ballots that could not initially be read by a machine, a normal part of the ballot counting process. The case alleged that the work had not always been overseen by election inspectors from both major political parties, and that certification should be delayed until inspectors could review the process.

3. To halt the certification of election results because of voter fraud

The campaign filed a federal lawsuit on Nov. 10 against Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Michigan board of state canvassers, and Wayne County (where Detroit is located), alleging that the results should not be certified because the defendants “allowed fraud and incompetence to corrupt the conduct of the 2020 general election.” The campaign said in its complaint that they have over 100 sworn affidavits from election challengers to prove these allegations. An examination of the affidavits found no evidence of fraud. The majority alleged they faced intimidation when trying to raise objections, and were frequently admonished to stay within six feet of election officials.

Georgia
In Georgia, where the on-going count suggests an extremely tight race, the Trump campaign has filed one suit:

1. To disqualify about 53 ballots.

A poll watcher in Chatham County reported seeing a stack of late ballots that may have arrived after the 7 p.m. Election Day deadline get mixed in with ballots that had arrived on time.

A Superior Court judge in Chatham County rejected the suit on Nov. 5 after hearing testimony from county officials that the ballots had, in fact, arrived on time. “There is no evidence that the ballots referenced in the petition were received after 7:00 p.m. on Election Day,” the court found.

Arizona:
Fox News and the Associated Press have declared Biden won the state, but other networks have held off, deeming the race too close to call. On November 7, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit in state court alleging voters’ ballots had been rejected because they contained “bleeds,” splotches” and “stray marks.” These allegations appear similar to claims circulating on social media that ballots would not be counted if voters filled them out using a Sharpie marker. Election officials have said these claims are false. A lawsuit with similar allegations was filed in the same court system by a group of voters who were represented by a conservative legal fund on Nov. 4; plaintiffs dropped the lawsuit on Nov. 7. They did not provide a reason for dismissing the case. On Nov. 13, the campaign’s attorney filed a notice of mootness, acknowledging the lawsuit was unlikely to change the outcome.
I see no evidence that the Trump campaign filed any of these lawsuits.
Says a lot about you.
Your lack of evidence says nothing about me.
I provided the evidence. Here is more of Giuliani in court making an idiot of himself.

You provided a list of lawsuits. You provided no evidence as to which were filed by Trump. The fact is that almost none of them were filed by Trump
 

Eric Arthur Blair

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Messages
19,140
Reaction score
9,556
Points
950
What the fuck are you talking about?
Nobody is trying to obstruct Trump's efforts.

It's the JUDGES who are either dismissing or denying his cases, you stupid fucking idiot.
Like the Obama appointee, supposedly a republican ( :icon_rolleyes: ), in Pennsylvania whose instantaneous and casual dismissal of a Trump suit got an injunction slapped on and now this case is going back and Pennsylvania cannot certify Dirty Joe Biden until the matter is cleared up.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,541
Reaction score
26,566
Points
2,180
The only thing the Supreme Court can do, is to reinstate the dismissed case, and remand it back to the original court. They can't make any injunctive relief, because there is not enough evidence on the record for them to make that judgement.
While I think you right.... You don't actually know that. Nor do I. Go to trial and see. *shrugs*
Yep, that's what the Supreme Court is for. Let's just go there and see if this shit flies. <-- sarcasm
Why are all you turds trying so hard to obstruct the legal process if you are so confident about Biden's case?
I'm not obstructing anything,. The courts are throwing out Trump's cases right and left for lack of evidence.
You're on this forum specifically to stop Trump's lawsuits. Who do you think you're kidding?
I am? How does being on this forum accomplish anything like that? I want Trump's team to file any pertinent law suits. Instead all they do is file frivolous lawsuits that get thrown out and waste everyone's time.
Sure you do. Then why don't you just shut the fuck up?
 

BasicHumanUnit

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
16,230
Reaction score
10,365
Points
1,255
Location
Everywhere needed
Those same shills that somehow forget to enter this "undeniable evidence" into actual court cases.
This.

One thing absolutely no one can explain thus far is why there is so much 'obvious' fraud and yet Trump's 'crack' legal team is not entering any of this into any actual court cases pursuing it.

It is almost as if random people are making random false claims.....

The Establishment................the end
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,104
Reaction score
3,543
Points
290
Until an affidavit is submitted to a court of law, there is no penalty for lying on it.

And so far, I don't know of any affidavits being accepted by a federal court in any of the lawsuits Trump filed.
That's your argument, "they haven't been submitted yet?"
The lawyers knew a great many of the affidavits people filed contained provable lies. Those affidavits were not submitted to court.

Those affidavits containing vague accusations (not provable either way) were the one's submitted.
Horseshit.
Why hasn't the Trump team presented any decent, believable examples of voter fraud in court? No time like the present.
They're too busy cleaning up Rudy Giuliani's hair dye.
And I was told there are some jobs Americans would not do.
You were told that by the same douchebags you voted for.
Yeah, little did they know how low you guys grovel.

Maybe take a different path, you keep walking into it.
You don't know the meaning of the word "grovel," obviously. Thanks for proving that you're an idiot.
No, groveling Trump supporters sounds about right.
Yes, to a retard it sounds right.
Neat. What you should be doing is sticking to the point of the thread, ain't nobody got team to roll in the mud with you.
"Team [sic] to roll in the mud?" "groveling" isn't the subject. You're killing me with this machine gun style stupidity.
Yeah, you're completely derailing the thread. I provided a link to the Trump team election challenges and you ignored it in favor of demonstrating your fantastic ability to misunderstand almost everything you read.
Yes, I did ignore it. List the ones that the Trump campaign filed.
You're going to ask for something that I already provided and you admit you ignored? Do you need to be spoon fed ya' big baby?

Ok, if that's what you want, baby.



Pennsylvania
Multiple legal battles over the Keystone State’s election laws were underway well before Election Day, but this week, the Trump campaign upped the ante. Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said in an interview that “there has been a lot of noise about litigation” but it has had “zero material impact” on the electoral process. “The count has continued. Legal votes are being tallied and soon the commonwealth will respect the will of the people and certify a vote,” he said. Since Tuesday, the campaign has filed at least five separate lawsuits, with mixed results:

1. To compel Philadelphia election officials to stop counting ballots.

A federal judge dismissed the request.

2. To compel state election officials to allow Trump campaign officials closer observation of the counting process.

A state judge ruled in the campaign’s favor, allowing campaign officials to observe the Philadelphia process from a six foot distance. Philadelphia election officials appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court. On Nov. 9, the court agreed to hear the case. On Nov. 15, the state’s supreme court overturned the lower court’s ruling, ruling that the original rules the campaign was fighting were justified.

Levitt says this ruling will likely affect the pace of the count, rather the outcome. “Imagine a gymnasium, with observers lining the walls: to let the observers get closer, they’ve got to move the count closer to the walls and not be counting in the center,” he writes. Since people can no longer count in the center of the gym, “the count is going to move more slowly.”

3. To compel Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and all 67 counties to impose an earlier date for voters to show proof of identification if it was not on their initial ballots.

On November 12, the presiding judge ruled in favor of the campaign, writing that ballots cast by voters who had not provided supplemental identification by Nov. 9 could not be counted. Previously, that judge had ordered all counties to segregate those ballots while weighing whether to count them. The Secretary of State’s office did not respond to a query about the number of ballots pertinent to this order. Shapiro said on Twitter the ruling impacted “very few ballots.”

Local Republicans filed a separate suit against Boockvar in state court, alleging she subverted state law when she issued guidance telling voters with deficiencies on their mail-in ballots to cast provisional ballots, and trying to prevent those provisional ballots from being counted. A state judge denied that request, but ordered officials to segregate provisional ballots from voters who submitted deficient mail-in ballots before election day.

4. To compel the Montgomery County Board of Elections to stop counting mail-in-ballots

The campaign and Republican National Committee filed suit to halt the process of counting mail-in ballots in Montgomery County, one of the counties in suburban Philadelphia, alleging that the board of elections was counting 592 ballots that had not been placed in secrecy envelopes and was therefore not complying with requirements. Pennsylvania election data shows Montgomery county overwhelmingly voted for Biden.

On November 13, a judge denied the request from the campaign, and ordered that the county could count the ballots. At an oral argument for the case on November 10, the lawyer representing the campaign, Jonathan S. Goldstein, told the judge they were not accusing the county administrators or the voters casting these ballots of voter fraud.

5. To intervene in an already existing dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether ballots the state received after 8 p.m. on Election Day should count.

The litigation is ongoing. Some legal experts are skeptical SCOTUS will take the case, while others say that even if the Justice do, their ruling is unlikely to change the outcome of the Presidential election. Pennsylvania election officials have said there are fewer than 10,000 ballots in this category, and Trump currently trails Biden by over 45,000 votes.

“I think that the court is going to be very hesitant to involve itself in the process in the most politically contentious context possible,” says Michael Dimino, an election law expert at Widener University in Pennsylvania. Joshua Geltzer, executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law, notes that the number of ballots that may fall in this category “appears increasingly irrelevant to the election outcome given the sheer vote numbers in that state regardless of those ballots.”

The backstory: After Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court extended the ballot receipt deadline to Nov. 6, state Republicans twice appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The first time they were unsuccessful, and the second time the court declined to expedite the decision before the election, but left open the possibility of hearing it afterwards. On Nov. 6, Supreme Court Justice Alito, in response to a motion from Pennsylvania Republicans, ordered state election officials to segregate any ballots that arrived after election day. State officials had already ordered counties to segregate any ballots that arrived after Election Day, likely anticipating a future challenge.

6. To stop Boockvar and seven individual counties from certifying the election results

The campaign filed a 105 page federal lawsuit on Nov. 9 alleging state officials created a “two tiered” system to ensure Biden would win the state by allowing vote-by mail – a violation the constitution’s equal protection clause – and that the results should consequently not be certified. The seven counties named as defendants in the lawsuit – Allegheny, Centre, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Northampton and Philadelphia – all voted for Biden.

Litigation is still ongoing, and the Democratic National Committee has filed a motion to intervene. Legal experts have said it is unlikely the case will succeed. Hasen wrote in the Atlantic that the claims are “ludicrous.” On Nov. 13, two attorneys with the law firm Porter Wright Morris & Arthur withdrew from representing the campaign. On Nov. 15, the campaign filed an amended, narrowed, complaint that focused solely on voters that had been allowed to correct deficiencies on their ballots. On Nov. 16, the second group of attorneys representing the campaign withdrew from the case.

7. To stop Bucks County from counting mail-in ballots

The campaign had previously filed a lawsuit in state court on election day to stop Bucks County – a suburban county near Philadelphia where Biden narrowly won – from counting mail-in ballots, but the lawsuit was dismissed. The campaign filed another complaint on Nov. 8, alleging that the county accepted over 2,200 defective ballots. A conference is scheduled for November 17.

It is unclear if the majority of these ballots were cast for Biden or Trump, although Democrats in the state overwhelmingly voted by mail this year. But even if the court rules in favor of the campaign and throws out these ballots, it is unlikely to change the outcome. Biden leads Trump by 16,000 votes in the county, according to unofficial results.

Nevada
With Trump narrowly trailing Biden in the state, the Trump campaign has backed two cases to impact the counting of ballots:

1. To impose an injunction on the automated signature-verification machines used in Clark County as ballots continue to be counted.

A federal judge rejected the request on Nov. 6, ruling that federal judges should not be involved in state election administration and there is no evidence Clark County is doing anything unlawful.

The backstory: The Trump campaign held a press conference on Nov. 5 introducing Jill Stokey, a Nevada voter who claimed that when she tried to cast a ballot, she was told someone had already cast a mail-in ballot in her name. She alleged that the signature verification technology used in Clark County, the most populous county in the state, enabled someone to cast a mail-in ballot in her name. Her lawsuit asserted, without evidence, that “lax procedures for authenticating mail ballots” had resulted in “over 3,000 instances of ineligible individuals casting ballots.”

Aaron Ford, Nevada’s Attorney General, called Stokey’s allegations “absurd.” “While the Attorney General’s Office normally does not comment on pending litigation, I feel compelled to dispel the misinformation being circulated to undermine the public’s trust in our election,” he said in a statement.

2. To compel state election officials to allow the public closer observation at a Clark County ballot-counting facility.

The Trump campaign, Republican National Committee, and a plaintiff, Fred Krause, filed a lawsuit before election day in state court seeking to halt the counting process in Clark County until they could observe the process.

A district judge rejected the lawsuit, ruling they lacked standing to bring the claims and had no evidence to back up their arguments. The plaintiffs appealed to the state Supreme Court, which accepted the request to expedite the case, but denied the request for immediate relief. In a November 5 order, the State Supreme Court said the campaign and state Republicans had reached a settlement. According to local news, the settlement included expanding observation access, so that all counting tables would be visible to the public. On November 10, the campaign officially filed to dismiss the suit.

Michigan
While the Associated Press called Michigan for Biden on Nov. 4, the Trump campaign and Republicans have continued to file lawsuits attempting, unsuccessfully, to stop the state ballot count. Biden currently leads Trump by approximately 148,000 votes. The state has seen at least three cases since Election Day:

1. To halt the counting of absentee ballots, on the grounds that campaign officials had not been given access to observe the process as required by state law.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the campaign’s request on Nov. 6.

2. To halt the certification of election results in Detroit, Michigan’s largest city and a Democratic stronghold.

Judge Timothy Kenny denied the motion for injunctive relief on Nov. 6, saying there was no evidence that oversight procedures had not been followed.

“Chief Judge Kenny’s quick decision mirrors a decision yesterday by Court of Claims Judge Stephens – specifically, that, once again, the allegations are mere speculation,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s Press Secretary Ryan Jarvi said in a statement. “The swift, clear and decisive opinion should put to rest the meritless claims that have been made in Michigan and other states around the country.”

The backstory: The case was not brought by the Trump campaign, but by a conservative group, the Election Integrity Fund, and sought to stop election workers in Detroit from “curing” absentee ballots that could not initially be read by a machine, a normal part of the ballot counting process. The case alleged that the work had not always been overseen by election inspectors from both major political parties, and that certification should be delayed until inspectors could review the process.

3. To halt the certification of election results because of voter fraud

The campaign filed a federal lawsuit on Nov. 10 against Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Michigan board of state canvassers, and Wayne County (where Detroit is located), alleging that the results should not be certified because the defendants “allowed fraud and incompetence to corrupt the conduct of the 2020 general election.” The campaign said in its complaint that they have over 100 sworn affidavits from election challengers to prove these allegations. An examination of the affidavits found no evidence of fraud. The majority alleged they faced intimidation when trying to raise objections, and were frequently admonished to stay within six feet of election officials.

Georgia
In Georgia, where the on-going count suggests an extremely tight race, the Trump campaign has filed one suit:

1. To disqualify about 53 ballots.

A poll watcher in Chatham County reported seeing a stack of late ballots that may have arrived after the 7 p.m. Election Day deadline get mixed in with ballots that had arrived on time.

A Superior Court judge in Chatham County rejected the suit on Nov. 5 after hearing testimony from county officials that the ballots had, in fact, arrived on time. “There is no evidence that the ballots referenced in the petition were received after 7:00 p.m. on Election Day,” the court found.

Arizona:
Fox News and the Associated Press have declared Biden won the state, but other networks have held off, deeming the race too close to call. On November 7, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit in state court alleging voters’ ballots had been rejected because they contained “bleeds,” splotches” and “stray marks.” These allegations appear similar to claims circulating on social media that ballots would not be counted if voters filled them out using a Sharpie marker. Election officials have said these claims are false. A lawsuit with similar allegations was filed in the same court system by a group of voters who were represented by a conservative legal fund on Nov. 4; plaintiffs dropped the lawsuit on Nov. 7. They did not provide a reason for dismissing the case. On Nov. 13, the campaign’s attorney filed a notice of mootness, acknowledging the lawsuit was unlikely to change the outcome.
I see no evidence that the Trump campaign filed any of these lawsuits.
Says a lot about you.
Your lack of evidence says nothing about me.
I provided the evidence. Here is more of Giuliani in court making an idiot of himself.

You provided a list of lawsuits. You provided no evidence as to which were filed by Trump. The fact is that almost none of them were filed by Trump

Yep, and they were filed or joined by the Trump team. I also provide an article demonstrating that Rudy himself was in court. If you want to continue to live under a rock and pretend like team Trump had nothing to do with them that's fine, we both know you're being dishonest. Anyone who reads this will have the same opinion and not a single person will be surprised.

Is that who you are?
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,104
Reaction score
3,543
Points
290
The only thing the Supreme Court can do, is to reinstate the dismissed case, and remand it back to the original court. They can't make any injunctive relief, because there is not enough evidence on the record for them to make that judgement.
While I think you right.... You don't actually know that. Nor do I. Go to trial and see. *shrugs*
Yep, that's what the Supreme Court is for. Let's just go there and see if this shit flies. <-- sarcasm
Why are all you turds trying so hard to obstruct the legal process if you are so confident about Biden's case?
I'm not obstructing anything,. The courts are throwing out Trump's cases right and left for lack of evidence.
You're on this forum specifically to stop Trump's lawsuits. Who do you think you're kidding?
I am? How does being on this forum accomplish anything like that? I want Trump's team to file any pertinent law suits. Instead all they do is file frivolous lawsuits that get thrown out and waste everyone's time.
Sure you do. Then why don't you just shut the fuck up?
Why so sad, porky?

I legit think your goal on this forum is just to make libs shut up. It hasn't worked so far.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,541
Reaction score
26,566
Points
2,180
Until an affidavit is submitted to a court of law, there is no penalty for lying on it.

And so far, I don't know of any affidavits being accepted by a federal court in any of the lawsuits Trump filed.
That's your argument, "they haven't been submitted yet?"
The lawyers knew a great many of the affidavits people filed contained provable lies. Those affidavits were not submitted to court.

Those affidavits containing vague accusations (not provable either way) were the one's submitted.
Horseshit.
Why hasn't the Trump team presented any decent, believable examples of voter fraud in court? No time like the present.
They're too busy cleaning up Rudy Giuliani's hair dye.
And I was told there are some jobs Americans would not do.
You were told that by the same douchebags you voted for.
Yeah, little did they know how low you guys grovel.

Maybe take a different path, you keep walking into it.
You don't know the meaning of the word "grovel," obviously. Thanks for proving that you're an idiot.
No, groveling Trump supporters sounds about right.
Yes, to a retard it sounds right.
Neat. What you should be doing is sticking to the point of the thread, ain't nobody got team to roll in the mud with you.
"Team [sic] to roll in the mud?" "groveling" isn't the subject. You're killing me with this machine gun style stupidity.
Yeah, you're completely derailing the thread. I provided a link to the Trump team election challenges and you ignored it in favor of demonstrating your fantastic ability to misunderstand almost everything you read.
Yes, I did ignore it. List the ones that the Trump campaign filed.
You're going to ask for something that I already provided and you admit you ignored? Do you need to be spoon fed ya' big baby?

Ok, if that's what you want, baby.



Pennsylvania
Multiple legal battles over the Keystone State’s election laws were underway well before Election Day, but this week, the Trump campaign upped the ante. Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said in an interview that “there has been a lot of noise about litigation” but it has had “zero material impact” on the electoral process. “The count has continued. Legal votes are being tallied and soon the commonwealth will respect the will of the people and certify a vote,” he said. Since Tuesday, the campaign has filed at least five separate lawsuits, with mixed results:

1. To compel Philadelphia election officials to stop counting ballots.

A federal judge dismissed the request.

2. To compel state election officials to allow Trump campaign officials closer observation of the counting process.

A state judge ruled in the campaign’s favor, allowing campaign officials to observe the Philadelphia process from a six foot distance. Philadelphia election officials appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court. On Nov. 9, the court agreed to hear the case. On Nov. 15, the state’s supreme court overturned the lower court’s ruling, ruling that the original rules the campaign was fighting were justified.

Levitt says this ruling will likely affect the pace of the count, rather the outcome. “Imagine a gymnasium, with observers lining the walls: to let the observers get closer, they’ve got to move the count closer to the walls and not be counting in the center,” he writes. Since people can no longer count in the center of the gym, “the count is going to move more slowly.”

3. To compel Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and all 67 counties to impose an earlier date for voters to show proof of identification if it was not on their initial ballots.

On November 12, the presiding judge ruled in favor of the campaign, writing that ballots cast by voters who had not provided supplemental identification by Nov. 9 could not be counted. Previously, that judge had ordered all counties to segregate those ballots while weighing whether to count them. The Secretary of State’s office did not respond to a query about the number of ballots pertinent to this order. Shapiro said on Twitter the ruling impacted “very few ballots.”

Local Republicans filed a separate suit against Boockvar in state court, alleging she subverted state law when she issued guidance telling voters with deficiencies on their mail-in ballots to cast provisional ballots, and trying to prevent those provisional ballots from being counted. A state judge denied that request, but ordered officials to segregate provisional ballots from voters who submitted deficient mail-in ballots before election day.

4. To compel the Montgomery County Board of Elections to stop counting mail-in-ballots

The campaign and Republican National Committee filed suit to halt the process of counting mail-in ballots in Montgomery County, one of the counties in suburban Philadelphia, alleging that the board of elections was counting 592 ballots that had not been placed in secrecy envelopes and was therefore not complying with requirements. Pennsylvania election data shows Montgomery county overwhelmingly voted for Biden.

On November 13, a judge denied the request from the campaign, and ordered that the county could count the ballots. At an oral argument for the case on November 10, the lawyer representing the campaign, Jonathan S. Goldstein, told the judge they were not accusing the county administrators or the voters casting these ballots of voter fraud.

5. To intervene in an already existing dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether ballots the state received after 8 p.m. on Election Day should count.

The litigation is ongoing. Some legal experts are skeptical SCOTUS will take the case, while others say that even if the Justice do, their ruling is unlikely to change the outcome of the Presidential election. Pennsylvania election officials have said there are fewer than 10,000 ballots in this category, and Trump currently trails Biden by over 45,000 votes.

“I think that the court is going to be very hesitant to involve itself in the process in the most politically contentious context possible,” says Michael Dimino, an election law expert at Widener University in Pennsylvania. Joshua Geltzer, executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law, notes that the number of ballots that may fall in this category “appears increasingly irrelevant to the election outcome given the sheer vote numbers in that state regardless of those ballots.”

The backstory: After Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court extended the ballot receipt deadline to Nov. 6, state Republicans twice appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The first time they were unsuccessful, and the second time the court declined to expedite the decision before the election, but left open the possibility of hearing it afterwards. On Nov. 6, Supreme Court Justice Alito, in response to a motion from Pennsylvania Republicans, ordered state election officials to segregate any ballots that arrived after election day. State officials had already ordered counties to segregate any ballots that arrived after Election Day, likely anticipating a future challenge.

6. To stop Boockvar and seven individual counties from certifying the election results

The campaign filed a 105 page federal lawsuit on Nov. 9 alleging state officials created a “two tiered” system to ensure Biden would win the state by allowing vote-by mail – a violation the constitution’s equal protection clause – and that the results should consequently not be certified. The seven counties named as defendants in the lawsuit – Allegheny, Centre, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Northampton and Philadelphia – all voted for Biden.

Litigation is still ongoing, and the Democratic National Committee has filed a motion to intervene. Legal experts have said it is unlikely the case will succeed. Hasen wrote in the Atlantic that the claims are “ludicrous.” On Nov. 13, two attorneys with the law firm Porter Wright Morris & Arthur withdrew from representing the campaign. On Nov. 15, the campaign filed an amended, narrowed, complaint that focused solely on voters that had been allowed to correct deficiencies on their ballots. On Nov. 16, the second group of attorneys representing the campaign withdrew from the case.

7. To stop Bucks County from counting mail-in ballots

The campaign had previously filed a lawsuit in state court on election day to stop Bucks County – a suburban county near Philadelphia where Biden narrowly won – from counting mail-in ballots, but the lawsuit was dismissed. The campaign filed another complaint on Nov. 8, alleging that the county accepted over 2,200 defective ballots. A conference is scheduled for November 17.

It is unclear if the majority of these ballots were cast for Biden or Trump, although Democrats in the state overwhelmingly voted by mail this year. But even if the court rules in favor of the campaign and throws out these ballots, it is unlikely to change the outcome. Biden leads Trump by 16,000 votes in the county, according to unofficial results.

Nevada
With Trump narrowly trailing Biden in the state, the Trump campaign has backed two cases to impact the counting of ballots:

1. To impose an injunction on the automated signature-verification machines used in Clark County as ballots continue to be counted.

A federal judge rejected the request on Nov. 6, ruling that federal judges should not be involved in state election administration and there is no evidence Clark County is doing anything unlawful.

The backstory: The Trump campaign held a press conference on Nov. 5 introducing Jill Stokey, a Nevada voter who claimed that when she tried to cast a ballot, she was told someone had already cast a mail-in ballot in her name. She alleged that the signature verification technology used in Clark County, the most populous county in the state, enabled someone to cast a mail-in ballot in her name. Her lawsuit asserted, without evidence, that “lax procedures for authenticating mail ballots” had resulted in “over 3,000 instances of ineligible individuals casting ballots.”

Aaron Ford, Nevada’s Attorney General, called Stokey’s allegations “absurd.” “While the Attorney General’s Office normally does not comment on pending litigation, I feel compelled to dispel the misinformation being circulated to undermine the public’s trust in our election,” he said in a statement.

2. To compel state election officials to allow the public closer observation at a Clark County ballot-counting facility.

The Trump campaign, Republican National Committee, and a plaintiff, Fred Krause, filed a lawsuit before election day in state court seeking to halt the counting process in Clark County until they could observe the process.

A district judge rejected the lawsuit, ruling they lacked standing to bring the claims and had no evidence to back up their arguments. The plaintiffs appealed to the state Supreme Court, which accepted the request to expedite the case, but denied the request for immediate relief. In a November 5 order, the State Supreme Court said the campaign and state Republicans had reached a settlement. According to local news, the settlement included expanding observation access, so that all counting tables would be visible to the public. On November 10, the campaign officially filed to dismiss the suit.

Michigan
While the Associated Press called Michigan for Biden on Nov. 4, the Trump campaign and Republicans have continued to file lawsuits attempting, unsuccessfully, to stop the state ballot count. Biden currently leads Trump by approximately 148,000 votes. The state has seen at least three cases since Election Day:

1. To halt the counting of absentee ballots, on the grounds that campaign officials had not been given access to observe the process as required by state law.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the campaign’s request on Nov. 6.

2. To halt the certification of election results in Detroit, Michigan’s largest city and a Democratic stronghold.

Judge Timothy Kenny denied the motion for injunctive relief on Nov. 6, saying there was no evidence that oversight procedures had not been followed.

“Chief Judge Kenny’s quick decision mirrors a decision yesterday by Court of Claims Judge Stephens – specifically, that, once again, the allegations are mere speculation,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s Press Secretary Ryan Jarvi said in a statement. “The swift, clear and decisive opinion should put to rest the meritless claims that have been made in Michigan and other states around the country.”

The backstory: The case was not brought by the Trump campaign, but by a conservative group, the Election Integrity Fund, and sought to stop election workers in Detroit from “curing” absentee ballots that could not initially be read by a machine, a normal part of the ballot counting process. The case alleged that the work had not always been overseen by election inspectors from both major political parties, and that certification should be delayed until inspectors could review the process.

3. To halt the certification of election results because of voter fraud

The campaign filed a federal lawsuit on Nov. 10 against Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Michigan board of state canvassers, and Wayne County (where Detroit is located), alleging that the results should not be certified because the defendants “allowed fraud and incompetence to corrupt the conduct of the 2020 general election.” The campaign said in its complaint that they have over 100 sworn affidavits from election challengers to prove these allegations. An examination of the affidavits found no evidence of fraud. The majority alleged they faced intimidation when trying to raise objections, and were frequently admonished to stay within six feet of election officials.

Georgia
In Georgia, where the on-going count suggests an extremely tight race, the Trump campaign has filed one suit:

1. To disqualify about 53 ballots.

A poll watcher in Chatham County reported seeing a stack of late ballots that may have arrived after the 7 p.m. Election Day deadline get mixed in with ballots that had arrived on time.

A Superior Court judge in Chatham County rejected the suit on Nov. 5 after hearing testimony from county officials that the ballots had, in fact, arrived on time. “There is no evidence that the ballots referenced in the petition were received after 7:00 p.m. on Election Day,” the court found.

Arizona:
Fox News and the Associated Press have declared Biden won the state, but other networks have held off, deeming the race too close to call. On November 7, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit in state court alleging voters’ ballots had been rejected because they contained “bleeds,” splotches” and “stray marks.” These allegations appear similar to claims circulating on social media that ballots would not be counted if voters filled them out using a Sharpie marker. Election officials have said these claims are false. A lawsuit with similar allegations was filed in the same court system by a group of voters who were represented by a conservative legal fund on Nov. 4; plaintiffs dropped the lawsuit on Nov. 7. They did not provide a reason for dismissing the case. On Nov. 13, the campaign’s attorney filed a notice of mootness, acknowledging the lawsuit was unlikely to change the outcome.
I see no evidence that the Trump campaign filed any of these lawsuits.
Says a lot about you.
Your lack of evidence says nothing about me.
I provided the evidence. Here is more of Giuliani in court making an idiot of himself.

You provided a list of lawsuits. You provided no evidence as to which were filed by Trump. The fact is that almost none of them were filed by Trump

Yep, and they were filed or joined by the Trump team. I also provide an article demonstrating that Rudy himself was in court. If you want to continue to live under a rock and pretend like team Trump had nothing to do with them that's fine, we both know you're being dishonest. Anyone who reads this will have the same opinion and not a single person will be surprised.

Is that who you are?
"Yep, and they were filed or joined by the Trump team."

Prove it, asshole.
 

AceRothstein

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
5,845
Reaction score
1,276
Points
245
Who the fuck knows, there is no sourcing, it's just some paper they are holding up.
At any hearing, the panel is allowed to see the physical evidence being presented. They weren't just waving cookie recipes around in the air. Glad to educate you on how a hearing works.
Imagine thinking a Republican bitch session at a Wyndham conference room is any kind of official hearing.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
134,541
Reaction score
26,566
Points
2,180
The only thing the Supreme Court can do, is to reinstate the dismissed case, and remand it back to the original court. They can't make any injunctive relief, because there is not enough evidence on the record for them to make that judgement.
While I think you right.... You don't actually know that. Nor do I. Go to trial and see. *shrugs*
Yep, that's what the Supreme Court is for. Let's just go there and see if this shit flies. <-- sarcasm
Why are all you turds trying so hard to obstruct the legal process if you are so confident about Biden's case?
I'm not obstructing anything,. The courts are throwing out Trump's cases right and left for lack of evidence.
You're on this forum specifically to stop Trump's lawsuits. Who do you think you're kidding?
I am? How does being on this forum accomplish anything like that? I want Trump's team to file any pertinent law suits. Instead all they do is file frivolous lawsuits that get thrown out and waste everyone's time.
Sure you do. Then why don't you just shut the fuck up?
Why so sad, porky?

I legit think your goal on this forum is just to make libs shut up. It hasn't worked so far.
I think your "legit goal" is ro prove to everyone how stupid you are.
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
27,104
Reaction score
3,543
Points
290
Until an affidavit is submitted to a court of law, there is no penalty for lying on it.

And so far, I don't know of any affidavits being accepted by a federal court in any of the lawsuits Trump filed.
That's your argument, "they haven't been submitted yet?"
The lawyers knew a great many of the affidavits people filed contained provable lies. Those affidavits were not submitted to court.

Those affidavits containing vague accusations (not provable either way) were the one's submitted.
Horseshit.
Why hasn't the Trump team presented any decent, believable examples of voter fraud in court? No time like the present.
They're too busy cleaning up Rudy Giuliani's hair dye.
And I was told there are some jobs Americans would not do.
You were told that by the same douchebags you voted for.
Yeah, little did they know how low you guys grovel.

Maybe take a different path, you keep walking into it.
You don't know the meaning of the word "grovel," obviously. Thanks for proving that you're an idiot.
No, groveling Trump supporters sounds about right.
Yes, to a retard it sounds right.
Neat. What you should be doing is sticking to the point of the thread, ain't nobody got team to roll in the mud with you.
"Team [sic] to roll in the mud?" "groveling" isn't the subject. You're killing me with this machine gun style stupidity.
Yeah, you're completely derailing the thread. I provided a link to the Trump team election challenges and you ignored it in favor of demonstrating your fantastic ability to misunderstand almost everything you read.
Yes, I did ignore it. List the ones that the Trump campaign filed.
You're going to ask for something that I already provided and you admit you ignored? Do you need to be spoon fed ya' big baby?

Ok, if that's what you want, baby.



Pennsylvania
Multiple legal battles over the Keystone State’s election laws were underway well before Election Day, but this week, the Trump campaign upped the ante. Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro said in an interview that “there has been a lot of noise about litigation” but it has had “zero material impact” on the electoral process. “The count has continued. Legal votes are being tallied and soon the commonwealth will respect the will of the people and certify a vote,” he said. Since Tuesday, the campaign has filed at least five separate lawsuits, with mixed results:

1. To compel Philadelphia election officials to stop counting ballots.

A federal judge dismissed the request.

2. To compel state election officials to allow Trump campaign officials closer observation of the counting process.

A state judge ruled in the campaign’s favor, allowing campaign officials to observe the Philadelphia process from a six foot distance. Philadelphia election officials appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court. On Nov. 9, the court agreed to hear the case. On Nov. 15, the state’s supreme court overturned the lower court’s ruling, ruling that the original rules the campaign was fighting were justified.

Levitt says this ruling will likely affect the pace of the count, rather the outcome. “Imagine a gymnasium, with observers lining the walls: to let the observers get closer, they’ve got to move the count closer to the walls and not be counting in the center,” he writes. Since people can no longer count in the center of the gym, “the count is going to move more slowly.”

3. To compel Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and all 67 counties to impose an earlier date for voters to show proof of identification if it was not on their initial ballots.

On November 12, the presiding judge ruled in favor of the campaign, writing that ballots cast by voters who had not provided supplemental identification by Nov. 9 could not be counted. Previously, that judge had ordered all counties to segregate those ballots while weighing whether to count them. The Secretary of State’s office did not respond to a query about the number of ballots pertinent to this order. Shapiro said on Twitter the ruling impacted “very few ballots.”

Local Republicans filed a separate suit against Boockvar in state court, alleging she subverted state law when she issued guidance telling voters with deficiencies on their mail-in ballots to cast provisional ballots, and trying to prevent those provisional ballots from being counted. A state judge denied that request, but ordered officials to segregate provisional ballots from voters who submitted deficient mail-in ballots before election day.

4. To compel the Montgomery County Board of Elections to stop counting mail-in-ballots

The campaign and Republican National Committee filed suit to halt the process of counting mail-in ballots in Montgomery County, one of the counties in suburban Philadelphia, alleging that the board of elections was counting 592 ballots that had not been placed in secrecy envelopes and was therefore not complying with requirements. Pennsylvania election data shows Montgomery county overwhelmingly voted for Biden.

On November 13, a judge denied the request from the campaign, and ordered that the county could count the ballots. At an oral argument for the case on November 10, the lawyer representing the campaign, Jonathan S. Goldstein, told the judge they were not accusing the county administrators or the voters casting these ballots of voter fraud.

5. To intervene in an already existing dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether ballots the state received after 8 p.m. on Election Day should count.

The litigation is ongoing. Some legal experts are skeptical SCOTUS will take the case, while others say that even if the Justice do, their ruling is unlikely to change the outcome of the Presidential election. Pennsylvania election officials have said there are fewer than 10,000 ballots in this category, and Trump currently trails Biden by over 45,000 votes.

“I think that the court is going to be very hesitant to involve itself in the process in the most politically contentious context possible,” says Michael Dimino, an election law expert at Widener University in Pennsylvania. Joshua Geltzer, executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law, notes that the number of ballots that may fall in this category “appears increasingly irrelevant to the election outcome given the sheer vote numbers in that state regardless of those ballots.”

The backstory: After Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court extended the ballot receipt deadline to Nov. 6, state Republicans twice appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The first time they were unsuccessful, and the second time the court declined to expedite the decision before the election, but left open the possibility of hearing it afterwards. On Nov. 6, Supreme Court Justice Alito, in response to a motion from Pennsylvania Republicans, ordered state election officials to segregate any ballots that arrived after election day. State officials had already ordered counties to segregate any ballots that arrived after Election Day, likely anticipating a future challenge.

6. To stop Boockvar and seven individual counties from certifying the election results

The campaign filed a 105 page federal lawsuit on Nov. 9 alleging state officials created a “two tiered” system to ensure Biden would win the state by allowing vote-by mail – a violation the constitution’s equal protection clause – and that the results should consequently not be certified. The seven counties named as defendants in the lawsuit – Allegheny, Centre, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Northampton and Philadelphia – all voted for Biden.

Litigation is still ongoing, and the Democratic National Committee has filed a motion to intervene. Legal experts have said it is unlikely the case will succeed. Hasen wrote in the Atlantic that the claims are “ludicrous.” On Nov. 13, two attorneys with the law firm Porter Wright Morris & Arthur withdrew from representing the campaign. On Nov. 15, the campaign filed an amended, narrowed, complaint that focused solely on voters that had been allowed to correct deficiencies on their ballots. On Nov. 16, the second group of attorneys representing the campaign withdrew from the case.

7. To stop Bucks County from counting mail-in ballots

The campaign had previously filed a lawsuit in state court on election day to stop Bucks County – a suburban county near Philadelphia where Biden narrowly won – from counting mail-in ballots, but the lawsuit was dismissed. The campaign filed another complaint on Nov. 8, alleging that the county accepted over 2,200 defective ballots. A conference is scheduled for November 17.

It is unclear if the majority of these ballots were cast for Biden or Trump, although Democrats in the state overwhelmingly voted by mail this year. But even if the court rules in favor of the campaign and throws out these ballots, it is unlikely to change the outcome. Biden leads Trump by 16,000 votes in the county, according to unofficial results.

Nevada
With Trump narrowly trailing Biden in the state, the Trump campaign has backed two cases to impact the counting of ballots:

1. To impose an injunction on the automated signature-verification machines used in Clark County as ballots continue to be counted.

A federal judge rejected the request on Nov. 6, ruling that federal judges should not be involved in state election administration and there is no evidence Clark County is doing anything unlawful.

The backstory: The Trump campaign held a press conference on Nov. 5 introducing Jill Stokey, a Nevada voter who claimed that when she tried to cast a ballot, she was told someone had already cast a mail-in ballot in her name. She alleged that the signature verification technology used in Clark County, the most populous county in the state, enabled someone to cast a mail-in ballot in her name. Her lawsuit asserted, without evidence, that “lax procedures for authenticating mail ballots” had resulted in “over 3,000 instances of ineligible individuals casting ballots.”

Aaron Ford, Nevada’s Attorney General, called Stokey’s allegations “absurd.” “While the Attorney General’s Office normally does not comment on pending litigation, I feel compelled to dispel the misinformation being circulated to undermine the public’s trust in our election,” he said in a statement.

2. To compel state election officials to allow the public closer observation at a Clark County ballot-counting facility.

The Trump campaign, Republican National Committee, and a plaintiff, Fred Krause, filed a lawsuit before election day in state court seeking to halt the counting process in Clark County until they could observe the process.

A district judge rejected the lawsuit, ruling they lacked standing to bring the claims and had no evidence to back up their arguments. The plaintiffs appealed to the state Supreme Court, which accepted the request to expedite the case, but denied the request for immediate relief. In a November 5 order, the State Supreme Court said the campaign and state Republicans had reached a settlement. According to local news, the settlement included expanding observation access, so that all counting tables would be visible to the public. On November 10, the campaign officially filed to dismiss the suit.

Michigan
While the Associated Press called Michigan for Biden on Nov. 4, the Trump campaign and Republicans have continued to file lawsuits attempting, unsuccessfully, to stop the state ballot count. Biden currently leads Trump by approximately 148,000 votes. The state has seen at least three cases since Election Day:

1. To halt the counting of absentee ballots, on the grounds that campaign officials had not been given access to observe the process as required by state law.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Cynthia Stephens denied the campaign’s request on Nov. 6.

2. To halt the certification of election results in Detroit, Michigan’s largest city and a Democratic stronghold.

Judge Timothy Kenny denied the motion for injunctive relief on Nov. 6, saying there was no evidence that oversight procedures had not been followed.

“Chief Judge Kenny’s quick decision mirrors a decision yesterday by Court of Claims Judge Stephens – specifically, that, once again, the allegations are mere speculation,” Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s Press Secretary Ryan Jarvi said in a statement. “The swift, clear and decisive opinion should put to rest the meritless claims that have been made in Michigan and other states around the country.”

The backstory: The case was not brought by the Trump campaign, but by a conservative group, the Election Integrity Fund, and sought to stop election workers in Detroit from “curing” absentee ballots that could not initially be read by a machine, a normal part of the ballot counting process. The case alleged that the work had not always been overseen by election inspectors from both major political parties, and that certification should be delayed until inspectors could review the process.

3. To halt the certification of election results because of voter fraud

The campaign filed a federal lawsuit on Nov. 10 against Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, the Michigan board of state canvassers, and Wayne County (where Detroit is located), alleging that the results should not be certified because the defendants “allowed fraud and incompetence to corrupt the conduct of the 2020 general election.” The campaign said in its complaint that they have over 100 sworn affidavits from election challengers to prove these allegations. An examination of the affidavits found no evidence of fraud. The majority alleged they faced intimidation when trying to raise objections, and were frequently admonished to stay within six feet of election officials.

Georgia
In Georgia, where the on-going count suggests an extremely tight race, the Trump campaign has filed one suit:

1. To disqualify about 53 ballots.

A poll watcher in Chatham County reported seeing a stack of late ballots that may have arrived after the 7 p.m. Election Day deadline get mixed in with ballots that had arrived on time.

A Superior Court judge in Chatham County rejected the suit on Nov. 5 after hearing testimony from county officials that the ballots had, in fact, arrived on time. “There is no evidence that the ballots referenced in the petition were received after 7:00 p.m. on Election Day,” the court found.

Arizona:
Fox News and the Associated Press have declared Biden won the state, but other networks have held off, deeming the race too close to call. On November 7, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit in state court alleging voters’ ballots had been rejected because they contained “bleeds,” splotches” and “stray marks.” These allegations appear similar to claims circulating on social media that ballots would not be counted if voters filled them out using a Sharpie marker. Election officials have said these claims are false. A lawsuit with similar allegations was filed in the same court system by a group of voters who were represented by a conservative legal fund on Nov. 4; plaintiffs dropped the lawsuit on Nov. 7. They did not provide a reason for dismissing the case. On Nov. 13, the campaign’s attorney filed a notice of mootness, acknowledging the lawsuit was unlikely to change the outcome.
I see no evidence that the Trump campaign filed any of these lawsuits.
Says a lot about you.
Your lack of evidence says nothing about me.
I provided the evidence. Here is more of Giuliani in court making an idiot of himself.

You provided a list of lawsuits. You provided no evidence as to which were filed by Trump. The fact is that almost none of them were filed by Trump

Yep, and they were filed or joined by the Trump team. I also provide an article demonstrating that Rudy himself was in court. If you want to continue to live under a rock and pretend like team Trump had nothing to do with them that's fine, we both know you're being dishonest. Anyone who reads this will have the same opinion and not a single person will be surprised.

Is that who you are?
"Yep, and they were filed or joined by the Trump team."

Prove it, asshole.
I did, it's common knowledge and I've provided 3 links in total. Maybe you could find something showing the band of idiots never filed a lawsuit.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top