Sydney Powell's "Excuse" puts the BIG LIE of election fraud to rest...

[mamooth]

It can’t be changed per national elections without the legislature.

Unless the state legislatures delegated the power of implementing the details to state election officials.

Which they did.

And so your conspiracy theory collapses.

 

[Lastamender]

It can’t be changed per national elections without the legislature.

Unless the state legislatures delegated the power of implementing the details to state election officials.

Which they did.

And so your conspiracy theory collapses.

No, they did not. But do not let that stop you from proving it. Link?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Section 1. Equal protection under the law.

It’s not. As long as everyone has to follow the same rules in a state, there is no violation.

The rules must be legislated.

There’s always details that are left to the election boards and administration to sort out. No legislature makes a law for everything.

Obviously.

The constitution stipulates that any election rules changes must go through the state legislature.
PA didn’t do this. Left wing judges and non-left wing judges refused to consider any cases. The non-left wing judges due to fear of attack by democrat fascists who destroyed cities all year.

It doesn’t say that. It says the manner of the election is determined by the legislature. That’s not the same thing.

But it is the same thing. Read what you wrote.
No honest person would accept the numbers of this election. An audit was warranted but not granted due to bias and/or fear of reprisal.
Ox-Bow election.

It’s not. Method and means are not quite the same.

The numbers are legitimate. The people who don’t want to accept them merely can’t come to terms with losing.

The numbers are suspicious to say the least. Only dishonest people believe otherwise.

When you decided before the election that Trump won, then any number that doesn’t result in that outcome would seem suspicious.

That doesn’t mean it is.

My interpretation is rooted in results and figures.
Anyone who doesn’t question the veracity of the 2020 election is dishonest.

So the only reason a person could come to the conclusion that the 2020 election was fair is dishonesty?

You don't think the fact that it was monitored by members of both parties could make you draw that conclusion?

Or the fact that widespread voter fraud wasn't even alleged in court besides that is by Powell. Something she now claims was done in jest.

Or the fact that the lawsuits that were actually filed by Trump were shot down almost across the board.

A few weeks ago I had a discussion with my brother about believing something to be true because it sounds logical. It took me giving an example of giving a logical but different explanation for something he believes, before he realised that theirs a difference between believing something to be true and it actually being true.

No dishonesty is required to believe something different than what you believe.

Anyone who doesn’t believe that election deserves an audit is dishonest.
The anomalies are too conspicuous to ignore.

I have no problem with auditing an election. I have a problem with claiming voter fraud happened even after audits happen. I have a problem with demanding other people having to carry the burden of paying for an audit when the margins in the election in states have a zero chance of changing the results.
I have a problem with demanding audits when no credible reason for it can be established in a court of law.

There are several safeguards in place to ensure voter fraud is minimal. Measures that are enforced by members of both parties. Measures that allow an aggrieved party to challenge the election result. Measures that are arbitrated by the judicial system that is equally bipartisan.

If after all those safeguards have been applied you still are not satisfied that is just tough and by no means dishonesty on the part of those that have been satisfied.

Anyone who doesn’t request an audit on that election is dishonest.
That you’re too easily satisfied with election results with those anomalies suggests that you’re dishonest.

 

[mamooth]

No, they did not. But do not let that stop you from proving it. Link?

Of course they did. It's how all laws work, not just election laws. Legislatures pass the framework, then the executive implements the details. And if someone thinks the implementation doesn't match the law, they file a lawsuit, and the courts make a ruling.

For reasons unknown, you think that system is okay for all laws except election law. Go fig.

Did anyone even file a case based on your insane PC revisionist legal theory?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

It can’t be changed per national elections without the legislature.

Unless the state legislatures delegated the power of implementing the details to state election officials.

Which they did.

And so your conspiracy theory collapses.

Wrong. The constitution stipulates that states must legislate election rules changes per national elections. Search it.

 

[Lastamender]

No, they did not. But do not let that stop you from proving it. Link?

Of course they did. It's how all laws work, not just election laws. Legislatures pass the framework, then the executive implements the details. And if someone thinks the implementation doesn't match the law, they file a lawsuit, and the courts make a ruling.

For reasons unknown, you think that system is okay for all laws except election law. Go fig.

Did anyone even file a case based on your insane PC revisionist legal theory?

You have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

 

[colfax_m]

Of course it is not legal. Why do you think it came out? Do you know somebody that lives in a little box besides homeless people?

No, I think people live in an apartment building and use a PO Box to deliver mail for convenience.

You got a law that doesn’t allow for that?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Of course it is not legal. Why do you think it came out? Do you know somebody that lives in a little box besides homeless people?

No, I think people live in an apartment building and use a PO Box to deliver mail for convenience.

You got a law that doesn’t allow for that?

And when democrats have the least reason to mail-in but the democrat candidate receives 60% of his votes from mail-in’s you have serious suspicion.

 

[forkup]

Section 1. Equal protection under the law.

It’s not. As long as everyone has to follow the same rules in a state, there is no violation.

The rules must be legislated.

There’s always details that are left to the election boards and administration to sort out. No legislature makes a law for everything.

Obviously.

The constitution stipulates that any election rules changes must go through the state legislature.
PA didn’t do this. Left wing judges and non-left wing judges refused to consider any cases. The non-left wing judges due to fear of attack by democrat fascists who destroyed cities all year.

It doesn’t say that. It says the manner of the election is determined by the legislature. That’s not the same thing.

But it is the same thing. Read what you wrote.
No honest person would accept the numbers of this election. An audit was warranted but not granted due to bias and/or fear of reprisal.
Ox-Bow election.

It’s not. Method and means are not quite the same.

The numbers are legitimate. The people who don’t want to accept them merely can’t come to terms with losing.

The numbers are suspicious to say the least. Only dishonest people believe otherwise.

When you decided before the election that Trump won, then any number that doesn’t result in that outcome would seem suspicious.

That doesn’t mean it is.

My interpretation is rooted in results and figures.
Anyone who doesn’t question the veracity of the 2020 election is dishonest.

So the only reason a person could come to the conclusion that the 2020 election was fair is dishonesty?

You don't think the fact that it was monitored by members of both parties could make you draw that conclusion?

Or the fact that widespread voter fraud wasn't even alleged in court besides that is by Powell. Something she now claims was done in jest.

Or the fact that the lawsuits that were actually filed by Trump were shot down almost across the board.

A few weeks ago I had a discussion with my brother about believing something to be true because it sounds logical. It took me giving an example of giving a logical but different explanation for something he believes, before he realised that theirs a difference between believing something to be true and it actually being true.

No dishonesty is required to believe something different than what you believe.

Anyone who doesn’t believe that election deserves an audit is dishonest.
The anomalies are too conspicuous to ignore.

I have no problem with auditing an election. I have a problem with claiming voter fraud happened even after audits happen. I have a problem with demanding other people having to carry the burden of paying for an audit when the margins in the election in states have a zero chance of changing the results.
I have a problem with demanding audits when no credible reason for it can be established in a court of law.

There are several safeguards in place to ensure voter fraud is minimal. Measures that are enforced by members of both parties. Measures that allow an aggrieved party to challenge the election result. Measures that are arbitrated by the judicial system that is equally bipartisan.

If after all those safeguards have been applied you still are not satisfied that is just tough and by no means dishonesty on the part of those that have been satisfied.

Anyone who doesn’t request an audit on that election is dishonest.
That you’re too easily satisfied with election results with those anomalies suggests that you’re dishonest.

The fact that you aren't disputing the election was monitored by both parties and arbitrated by the judicial system and that no instances of large-scale voter fraud have been credibly alleged. And the fact that despite those facts you are still insisting you have reason to believe the election where stolen speaks more to your honesty than mine. (and no I don't think you're being dishonest just biased to a point that you can't rationally examine the facts.)

Ask yourself this. What would you accept as credible proof of an honest election? I highly doubt there is anything you would accept. Since audits, manual recounts, lawyers for Trump saying it there was no voter fraud, lawyers for Trump saying they claimed voter fraud in jest, the AG (a very partisan AG) saying there was no voter fraud, judges nominated by Trump saying there is no evidence for voter fraud, certification of the election result by Republican officials, certification of the election results by congress apparently aren't sufficient.

 

[The Banker]

LIAR

View attachment 472225

The evidence was 100% to multiple courts. YOU IGNORE THIS FACT. HERE ARE SOME OF THE JUDGES WHO SAW THIS EVIDENCE RESPONSE:

"The court finds that there is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”

The Trump campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor...in an amount sufficient to raise reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the election,”

Chief Justice Robert Brutinel agreed, saying Ward's challenge had failed to "present any evidence of 'misconduct,' 'illegal votes' or that the Biden Electors 'did not in fact receive the highest number of votes for office,'" he wrote — "let alone establish any degree of fraud or a sufficient error rate that would undermine the certainty of the election results."

ANYBODY THAT TRIES TO CLAIM THE EVIDENCE WAS NEVER PRESENTED IS A TOTAL LIAR.

What a joke. A bunch of drivel pasted here unsupported by even a link to the source! Admit it fool, you got nothing. The election was a fraud and Biden is an illegal usurper in the WH who should be locked up for impersonating a president.

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

Trump's lawyers, including Giuliani, presented all the fake evidence in court, in front of Trump appointed judges, in different states. Every judge that saw the fake evidence rejected it:

"The court finds that there is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”

The Trump campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor...in an amount sufficient to raise reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the election,”

Chief Justice Robert Brutinel agreed, saying Ward's challenge had failed to "present any evidence of 'misconduct,' 'illegal votes' or that the Biden Electors 'did not in fact receive the highest number of votes for office,'" he wrote — "let alone establish any degree of fraud or a sufficient error rate that would undermine the certainty of the election results."

A look at what several state supreme courts said about rejecting attempts to overturn Biden's election win

Supreme Courts in several states have rejected efforts by the Trump campaign. Here is a look at what some of those courts had to say.

www.usatoday.com

Trump Campaign Has ‘No Credible Or Reliable Evidence’ Proving Voter Fraud, Nevada Court Rules

The court dismissed the campaign’s lawsuit trying to overturn the election results.

www.forbes.com

They presented no evidence in court. They never got an evidentiary hearing. They got a judge's opinion. Dumbass liar.

Nope they presented evidence and it was rejected, because it was lies. Even by Trump appointed judges.

You are just a little fuckin bitch who can't admit Trump lost. At least lose with dignity. The GOP has no dignity.

Trump did not lose. Your post is nothing but you showing your guilt. Why do you keep insisting there was no fraud? A child could see there was massive fraud and a massive conspiracy to cover that fraud up.

Admit it the election was stolen and you have no problem with a corrupt illegitimate administration. On you!

Except the judges saw the made up evidence and said it was garbage. Sydney Powell said :
"no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact"
2 months later and nobody has produced any credible evidence of fraud.
Case closed.

"The court finds that there is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”

The Trump campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor...in an amount sufficient to raise reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the election,”

Chief Justice Robert Brutinel agreed, saying Ward's challenge had failed to "present any evidence of 'misconduct,' 'illegal votes' or that the Biden Electors 'did not in fact receive the highest number of votes for office,'" he wrote — "let alone establish any degree of fraud or a sufficient error rate that would undermine the certainty of the election results."

Like I said a corrupt judges opinion. No one cares. The fraud was obvious.

AHAHAHA!!!!

Corrupt judges !!!!!!

AHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

At least lose with dignity you sucka ass bitch. You are a pathetic weakling.

 

[mamooth]

Wrong. The constitution stipulates that states must legislate election rules changes per national elections.

No, it doesn't. Repeating that stupid claim doesn't make it any less stupid.

All the Constitution says is "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors ...". That just says that states choose their election laws. It in no way states or implies that every tiny detail of election has to be specifically legislated, and every tiny change has to be re-legislated. That's why the legislatures gave that power to election officials.

So, tell us, which lawsuits were filed based on that crazy claim? I know the Texas lawsuit was, but the SC tossed that one for lack of standing. Very rightfully, since one state has no business telling another state how to run its elections. The Constitution is clear on that.

 

[Lastamender]

LIAR

View attachment 472225

The evidence was 100% to multiple courts. YOU IGNORE THIS FACT. HERE ARE SOME OF THE JUDGES WHO SAW THIS EVIDENCE RESPONSE:

"The court finds that there is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”

The Trump campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor...in an amount sufficient to raise reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the election,”

Chief Justice Robert Brutinel agreed, saying Ward's challenge had failed to "present any evidence of 'misconduct,' 'illegal votes' or that the Biden Electors 'did not in fact receive the highest number of votes for office,'" he wrote — "let alone establish any degree of fraud or a sufficient error rate that would undermine the certainty of the election results."

ANYBODY THAT TRIES TO CLAIM THE EVIDENCE WAS NEVER PRESENTED IS A TOTAL LIAR.

What a joke. A bunch of drivel pasted here unsupported by even a link to the source! Admit it fool, you got nothing. The election was a fraud and Biden is an illegal usurper in the WH who should be locked up for impersonating a president.

Courts Repeatedly Ignored Merits Of Trump’s Election Claims

The losing side needed to know that a fair shake was given, and that justice prevailed, even if it wasn't the outcome they wanted. That did not happen.

thefederalist.com

Trump's lawyers, including Giuliani, presented all the fake evidence in court, in front of Trump appointed judges, in different states. Every judge that saw the fake evidence rejected it:

"The court finds that there is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”

The Trump campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor...in an amount sufficient to raise reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the election,”

Chief Justice Robert Brutinel agreed, saying Ward's challenge had failed to "present any evidence of 'misconduct,' 'illegal votes' or that the Biden Electors 'did not in fact receive the highest number of votes for office,'" he wrote — "let alone establish any degree of fraud or a sufficient error rate that would undermine the certainty of the election results."

A look at what several state supreme courts said about rejecting attempts to overturn Biden's election win

Supreme Courts in several states have rejected efforts by the Trump campaign. Here is a look at what some of those courts had to say.

www.usatoday.com

Trump Campaign Has ‘No Credible Or Reliable Evidence’ Proving Voter Fraud, Nevada Court Rules

The court dismissed the campaign’s lawsuit trying to overturn the election results.

www.forbes.com

They presented no evidence in court. They never got an evidentiary hearing. They got a judge's opinion. Dumbass liar.

Nope they presented evidence and it was rejected, because it was lies. Even by Trump appointed judges.

You are just a little fuckin bitch who can't admit Trump lost. At least lose with dignity. The GOP has no dignity.

Trump did not lose. Your post is nothing but you showing your guilt. Why do you keep insisting there was no fraud? A child could see there was massive fraud and a massive conspiracy to cover that fraud up.

Admit it the election was stolen and you have no problem with a corrupt illegitimate administration. On you!

Except the judges saw the made up evidence and said it was garbage. Sydney Powell said :
"no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact"
2 months later and nobody has produced any credible evidence of fraud.
Case closed.

"The court finds that there is no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 General Election in Nevada was affected by fraud.”

The Trump campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor...in an amount sufficient to raise reasonable doubt as to the outcome of the election,”

Chief Justice Robert Brutinel agreed, saying Ward's challenge had failed to "present any evidence of 'misconduct,' 'illegal votes' or that the Biden Electors 'did not in fact receive the highest number of votes for office,'" he wrote — "let alone establish any degree of fraud or a sufficient error rate that would undermine the certainty of the election results."

Like I said a corrupt judges opinion. No one cares. The fraud was obvious.

AHAHAHA!!!!

Corrupt judges !!!!!!

AHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

At least lose with dignity you sucka ass bitch. You are a pathetic weakling.

Corrupt government. They are a big part of it. The fraud was obvious the cover up is ludicrous.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Section 1. Equal protection under the law.

It’s not. As long as everyone has to follow the same rules in a state, there is no violation.

The rules must be legislated.

There’s always details that are left to the election boards and administration to sort out. No legislature makes a law for everything.

Obviously.

The constitution stipulates that any election rules changes must go through the state legislature.
PA didn’t do this. Left wing judges and non-left wing judges refused to consider any cases. The non-left wing judges due to fear of attack by democrat fascists who destroyed cities all year.

It doesn’t say that. It says the manner of the election is determined by the legislature. That’s not the same thing.

But it is the same thing. Read what you wrote.
No honest person would accept the numbers of this election. An audit was warranted but not granted due to bias and/or fear of reprisal.
Ox-Bow election.

It’s not. Method and means are not quite the same.

The numbers are legitimate. The people who don’t want to accept them merely can’t come to terms with losing.

The numbers are suspicious to say the least. Only dishonest people believe otherwise.

When you decided before the election that Trump won, then any number that doesn’t result in that outcome would seem suspicious.

That doesn’t mean it is.

My interpretation is rooted in results and figures.
Anyone who doesn’t question the veracity of the 2020 election is dishonest.

So the only reason a person could come to the conclusion that the 2020 election was fair is dishonesty?

You don't think the fact that it was monitored by members of both parties could make you draw that conclusion?

Or the fact that widespread voter fraud wasn't even alleged in court besides that is by Powell. Something she now claims was done in jest.

Or the fact that the lawsuits that were actually filed by Trump were shot down almost across the board.

A few weeks ago I had a discussion with my brother about believing something to be true because it sounds logical. It took me giving an example of giving a logical but different explanation for something he believes, before he realised that theirs a difference between believing something to be true and it actually being true.

No dishonesty is required to believe something different than what you believe.

Anyone who doesn’t believe that election deserves an audit is dishonest.
The anomalies are too conspicuous to ignore.

I have no problem with auditing an election. I have a problem with claiming voter fraud happened even after audits happen. I have a problem with demanding other people having to carry the burden of paying for an audit when the margins in the election in states have a zero chance of changing the results.
I have a problem with demanding audits when no credible reason for it can be established in a court of law.

There are several safeguards in place to ensure voter fraud is minimal. Measures that are enforced by members of both parties. Measures that allow an aggrieved party to challenge the election result. Measures that are arbitrated by the judicial system that is equally bipartisan.

If after all those safeguards have been applied you still are not satisfied that is just tough and by no means dishonesty on the part of those that have been satisfied.

Anyone who doesn’t request an audit on that election is dishonest.
That you’re too easily satisfied with election results with those anomalies suggests that you’re dishonest.

The fact that you aren't disputing the election was monitored by both parties and arbitrated by the judicial system and that no instances of large-scale voter fraud have been credibly alleged. And the fact that despite those facts you are still insisting you have reason to believe the election where stolen speaks more to your honesty than mine. (and no I don't think you're being dishonest just biased to a point that you can't rationally examine the facts.)

Ask yourself this. What would you accept as credible proof of an honest election? I highly doubt there is anything you would accept. Since audits, manual recounts, lawyers for Trump saying it there was no voter fraud, lawyers for Trump saying they claimed voter fraud in jest, the AG (a very partisan AG) saying there was no voter fraud, judges nominated by Trump saying there is no evidence for voter fraud, certification of the election result by Republican officials, certification of the election results by congress apparently aren't sufficient.

I would accept a thorough examination and verification of mail-in ballots.
That can’t happen because the verification elements have largely been destroyed.
I would then discount every unverifiable mail-in vote and/or every mail-in vote cast in violation of constitutional standards.
Until and unless that happens, no honest person should accept these results.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Wrong. The constitution stipulates that states must legislate election rules changes per national elections.

No, it doesn't. Repeating that stupid claim doesn't make it any less stupid.

All the Constitution says is "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors ...". That just says that states choose their election laws. It in no way states or implies that every tiny detail of election has to be specifically legislated, and every tiny change has to be re-legislated. That's why the legislatures gave that power to election officials.

So, tell us, which lawsuits were filed based on that crazy claim? I know the Texas lawsuit was, but the SC tossed that one for lack of standing. Very rightfully, since one state has no business telling another state how to run its elections. The Constitution is clear on that.

In Pennsylvania, state law states that the deadline for a county board of elections to receive a mail-in ballot is 8 p.m. on Election Day. Instead of following state law, judges, without any authorization by the Pennsylvania General Assembly, usurped legislative power by extending that deadline to three days after Election Day.

From here...

https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/1002928?section=politics&keywords=constitution-2020-elections-amicus-brief&year=2020&month=12&date=23&id=1002928&oref=duckduckgo.com

 

[toobfreak]

I already produced the proof.

NO YOU DIDN'T you stupid, jerked off idiot! Link us to where you proved that all 25 cases of fraud in Michigan alone have all been debunked.

 

[toobfreak]

if you could show even one "irregularity",

Hey JACKASS, I've LISTED the 25 cases of recorded Fraud in Michigan, I linked documentation and evidence supporting all of them, individually, and I've linked back to that post repeatedly in other threads several times, and now you stand there claiming I have produced nothing, you jacked off squirt?

 

[The Banker]

if you could show even one "irregularity",

Hey JACKASS, I've LISTED the 25 cases of recorded Fraud in Michigan, I linked documentation and evidence supporting all of them, individually, and I've linked back to that post repeatedly in other threads several times, and now you stand there claiming I have produced nothing, you jacked off squirt?

Anything you posted is fake lies, and has been disproven by the courts.

Only the dumbest gullible fucks believe that non sense. You dumb fucks believed pizzagate, the most ridiculous fake scandal ever. You fuckin retards believe any lie you are told no matter how insane.

SHEEP

Any court that saw the BS fake fraud evidence, that Giuliani presented all rejected it. There is no evidence of fraud at all.

 

[toobfreak]

Anything you posted is fake lies, and has been disproven by the courts.

So as usual, you got NOTHING, squid-brain.

 

[colfax_m]

NO YOU DIDN'T you stupid, jerked off idiot! Link us to where you proved that all 25 cases of fraud in Michigan alone have all been debunked.

Here.

https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Costantino-et-al-v-Detroit-et-al-Opinion-and-Order-11.13.20.pdf

 

[The Banker]

Anything you posted is fake lies, and has been disproven by the courts.

So as usual, you got NOTHING, squid-brain.

I don't need to have anything. Sydney Powell said she was lying about fraud. Not 1 single credible person has said there is any real evidence of fraud.

Trump just made it up and you believed it.

YOU NEED TO PRODUCE SOMETHING....

YOU HAVE NOTHING.