Michigan Judge approves release of Dominion forensic audit.

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I notice you are not saying anything other than no.

Still waiting for you to explain what you think it was about.

So after several failed attempts to characterize what Texas wanted from the Supreme Court, and refusing to
use your own head and figure things out, now you turn to me, after ignoring what I've already said about
the matter.

What a cowardly weasel you are. Texas properly pointed out that the Gang of Four states invalidated their presidential election results because they improperly changed their election laws before the election.
Texas did not ask for a specific remedy. Now fuck off, knothead.

 

[FA_Q2]

No, it actually is not. That is the states job.

That the party of states rights now wants the federal government to control local elections is beyond me. Should a state decide that electors will be chose by a die roll, that is their option and the SCOTUS has squat to say about it. That is at the very heart of our system.

All they really want to do is make sure the election was fair, because it makes no sense why people would vote out a President that's done such wonders for this country before the virus and put in an old man with dementia who promises the terrible things he plans on doing.

My state chose Donald Trump fair and square. If your state allowed fraud to go on and voted for Biden, that neutralizes our states vote to have Trump as President.

No, it does not because your vote is only valid and only counts to what your state does.

If they allowed fraud, the ONLY remedy is within that states judicial system because it is only that states laws that apply. The federal system is not empowered to control state elections. They have, of course, done it before as the feds try and exceed, grow and otherwise destroy the entire principal of federalism that our government relies on but that does not make it right.

It is not within the power of TX to decide that the election of another state is illegal or otherwise tainted. As I said before, if MI decided to roll a die rather than obey the vote they would be totally within their rights to do so. That there is serious questions on le legality of states that changed their election process without going through the proper methods of doing so is something that needs to be brought to each of those STATE Supreme Courts, NOT the SCOTUS.

If the states internal systems decide not to play ball, nothing TX can do about it as far as those state electors go. Of course, TX could treat their own electors as they please and could, in theory, respond in the manner that they sit their own electors but as they are already going to the other candidate there is not a whole lot of effect they can have.

The key is consistency. You cannot be for states rights as long as they are doing things that you think are correct and then want the feds to intervene on behalf of TX when they are doing things that you think are incorrect. A state either has power over its own election system or it does not. There is no middle ground there.

 

[FA_Q2]

I notice you are not saying anything other than no.

Still waiting for you to explain what you think it was about.

So after several failed attempts to characterize what Texas wanted from the Supreme Court, and refusing to
use your own head and figure things out, now you turn to me, after ignoring what I've already said about
the matter.

What a cowardly weasel you are. Texas properly pointed out that the Gang of Four states invalidated their presidential election results because they improperly changed their election laws before the election.
Texas did not ask for a specific remedy. Now fuck off, knothead.

So angry.

What I said still stands then, TX wanted SCOTUS to intervene, iow make a ruling, concerning another states elections. That you are unable to square that with states rights is your problem, not mine. That you cannot even participate in reasonable discourse without telling me to fuck off, engage in personal insults and otherwise act a fool just outlines you have nothing to stand on. Try again.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

The key is consistency. You cannot be for states rights as long as they are doing things that you think are correct and then want the feds to intervene on behalf of TX when they are doing things that you think are incorrect. A state either has power over its own election system or it does not. There is no middle ground there.

So five or six states can all get together and lie and cheat in the presidential election and Texas, or any other law abiding state, should have nothing to say about being disenfranchised?

You are a moron! That's like claiming if someone wants to drive sixty mph down the middle of town then
that's no one else's business!

But oh, wait...if someone drives recklessly it threatens the safety of others.
Just like the way cheating on your election laws threatens the sovereignty of other states and
disenfranchises voters there, you mean??

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

No, it does not because your vote is only valid and only counts to what your state does.

In a NATIONAL ELECTION what people do in Rhode Island effect and disenfranchise what people do in
Idaho, for instance. Election fraud effects everyone in the country.

 

[FA_Q2]

The key is consistency. You cannot be for states rights as long as they are doing things that you think are correct and then want the feds to intervene on behalf of TX when they are doing things that you think are incorrect. A state either has power over its own election system or it does not. There is no middle ground there.

So five or six states can all get together and lie and cheat in the presidential election and Texas, or any other law abiding state, should have nothing to say about being disenfranchised?

You are a moron! That's like claiming if someone wants to drive sixty mph down the middle of town then
that's no one else's business!

But oh, wait...if someone drives recklessly it threatens the safety of others.
Just like the way cheating on your election laws threatens the sovereignty of other states and
disenfranchises voters there, you mean??

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

But you accept that process because it works in your favor. Right back to consistence, other than personal attacks you have none.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

This just in! The sun is very hot and bright.

Yes, I'm grateful that this forensic audit of Dominion vote changing machines has been released
and now it's perfectly obvious that the election was corrupt and unethical, to say the least.

But what is the practical upshot? The Supreme Court could step in and block the presidency of
corrupt Joe Biden, if they had the guts and honesty to do the right thing. And if the so called conservative
justices would get spine transplants.

With the MSM in lockstep on their reporting "baseless" and enshrining Biden, it won't matter.

The MSM can pick the winner and ignore all other claims/counts/certifications/etc. As long as enough people let the MSM do their thinking for them, elections are no longer so, but selections.

Washington Post Motto: "Democracy dies in darkness"
The problem is that the Press is the "darkness"
They coverup Democrat scandals and makeup Republican scandals.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The only bright side of the Democrat Voter Fraud Crime is that Biden will be an eternal embarrassment and Harris will be even worse.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

But you accept that process because it works in your favor. Right back to consistence, other than personal attacks you have none.

Why are all these millions of people voting if their votes are pointless? You go on ignore, snowflake.
You are hopeless.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, it does not because your vote is only valid and only counts to what your state does.

If they allowed fraud, the ONLY remedy is within that states judicial system because it is only that states laws that apply. The federal system is not empowered to control state elections. They have, of course, done it before as the feds try and exceed, grow and otherwise destroy the entire principal of federalism that our government relies on but that does not make it right.

It is not within the power of TX to decide that the election of another state is illegal or otherwise tainted. As I said before, if MI decided to roll a die rather than obey the vote they would be totally within their rights to do so. That there is serious questions on le legality of states that changed their election process without going through the proper methods of doing so is something that needs to be brought to each of those STATE Supreme Courts, NOT the SCOTUS.

If the states internal systems decide not to play ball, nothing TX can do about it as far as those state electors go. Of course, TX could treat their own electors as they please and could, in theory, respond in the manner that they sit their own electors but as they are already going to the other candidate there is not a whole lot of effect they can have.

The key is consistency. You cannot be for states rights as long as they are doing things that you think are correct and then want the feds to intervene on behalf of TX when they are doing things that you think are incorrect. A state either has power over its own election system or it does not. There is no middle ground there.

We are collectively voting for a President of the United States, therefore what your state does matters to the rest of the country.

It's less about overturning an election than it is making sure no fraud took place. All Texas was doing is gathering other states to have voting machines, absentee ballots and other factors be investigated. Colonel Waldon testified in front of a Michigan panel of legislatures that these Dominion machines were by design to manipulate votes. He also testified that they don't have to take his word for it. All they have to do is look in the owners manual of those machines and Smartmatic software. I would think that alone should be investigated.

 

[FA_Q2]

No, it does not because your vote is only valid and only counts to what your state does.

In a NATIONAL ELECTION what people do in Rhode Island effect and disenfranchise what people do in
Idaho, for instance. Election fraud effects everyone in the country.

So you fundamentally misunderstand the system we have then.

Nov 3rd was not actually a national election, whatever shorthand the media like to use. It was actually 50 local STATE elections who use that to decide how they are going to seat the electors who are the only participants in a national election in any form whatsoever.

And, again, the states may chose those electors in VIRTUALLY ANY MANNER THEY WISH. Election fraud would, indeed, effect everyone in the nation. That does not mean that the legal remedies lie within an all powerful federal government. The ONLY PROPER legal remedies lie within the legal systems of the state election you wish to challenge.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

Yes, but most states require their electors vote according to the popular vote of the people.

 

[FA_Q2]

No, it does not because your vote is only valid and only counts to what your state does.

If they allowed fraud, the ONLY remedy is within that states judicial system because it is only that states laws that apply. The federal system is not empowered to control state elections. They have, of course, done it before as the feds try and exceed, grow and otherwise destroy the entire principal of federalism that our government relies on but that does not make it right.

It is not within the power of TX to decide that the election of another state is illegal or otherwise tainted. As I said before, if MI decided to roll a die rather than obey the vote they would be totally within their rights to do so. That there is serious questions on le legality of states that changed their election process without going through the proper methods of doing so is something that needs to be brought to each of those STATE Supreme Courts, NOT the SCOTUS.

If the states internal systems decide not to play ball, nothing TX can do about it as far as those state electors go. Of course, TX could treat their own electors as they please and could, in theory, respond in the manner that they sit their own electors but as they are already going to the other candidate there is not a whole lot of effect they can have.

The key is consistency. You cannot be for states rights as long as they are doing things that you think are correct and then want the feds to intervene on behalf of TX when they are doing things that you think are incorrect. A state either has power over its own election system or it does not. There is no middle ground there.

We are collectively voting for a President of the United States, therefore what your state does matters to the rest of the country.

It's less about overturning an election than it is making sure no fraud took place. All Texas was doing is gathering other states to have voting machines, absentee ballots and other factors be investigated. Colonel Waldon testified in front of a Michigan panel of legislatures that these Dominion machines were by design to manipulate votes. He also testified that they don't have to take his word for it. All they have to do is look in the owners manual of those machines and Smartmatic software. I would think that alone should be investigated.

See above post as well as:

It should be investigated. That does not change what I have stated. TX was seeking a FEDERAL ruling in a situation that is not under federal control.

Answer these questions and then see if you can honestly claim that the answers are consistent with a federal system where the power of state elections lie within the state.
Does a state have power over its own elections or not? Do you think the feds should control the local election?

If you are honest here, you cannot square states right and SCOTUS ruling over local elections.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

But you accept that process because it works in your favor. Right back to consistence, other than personal attacks you have none.

Why are all these millions of people voting if their votes are pointless? You go on ignore, snowflake.
You are hopeless.

Never said it was pointless but you go ahead and run away because you cannot handle your own position. Did not think it would be so simple to point out the rank hypocrisy here.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

Yes, but most states require their electors vote according to the popular vote of the people.

Yes they do.

IF there is a question on weather or not they are seating those electors properly WHO has the legal authority over that question?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

Yes, but most states require their electors vote according to the popular vote of the people.

Yes they do.

IF there is a question on weather or not they are seating those electors properly WHO has the legal authority over that question?

Their state citizens do for sure. But because it affects the outcome for the entire country, that's why they were getting together to make sure the votes were genuine.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Never said it was pointless but you go ahead and run away because you cannot handle your own position. Did not think it would be so simple to point out the rank hypocrisy here.

I'm leaving because you are such a massive waste of time. You keep making the same error filled argument over and over again. No matter what. And you simply cannot be reached. So fuck off.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

See above post as well as:

It should be investigated. That does not change what I have stated. TX was seeking a FEDERAL ruling in a situation that is not under federal control.

Answer these questions and then see if you can honestly claim that the answers are consistent with a federal system where the power of state elections lie within the state.
Does a state have power over its own elections or not? Do you think the feds should control the local election?

If you are honest here, you cannot square states right and SCOTUS ruling over local elections.

I said nothing about controlling states election system. All I was pointing out was the complaint. Asking the court to allow votes to be double checked is not controlling anything.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Yes they can because, as I have said multiple times, states control their own elections. Same reason that the EC can go for a president that did not win the popular vote - because people do not vote for presidents - STATES do by appointed elector.

Yes, but most states require their electors vote according to the popular vote of the people.

Yes they do.

IF there is a question on weather or not they are seating those electors properly WHO has the legal authority over that question?

Their state citizens do for sure. But because it affects the outcome for the entire country, that's why they were getting together to make sure the votes were genuine.

He doesn't get such basic distinctions. And he cannot spell, which is always a tip off. He's a loon.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

There are 4 cases still pending there,. Relax cupcake.

I'll relax when I see evidence that the Supreme Court is doing their job.

They had a chance already to end this blatant theft of the presidency and chickened out.

Nothing convinces me spines have been installed since then. Meanwhile the nation swirls down in
the toilet bowl of history.

I will happily say I was wrong if that's the case.

amen to that. If this judge does the right thing commie america hating michigan residents smellybozo and penelope will say this jusdge is corrupt.LOL