The courts should have taken on the voter fraud issue.

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
57,369
Reaction score
15,668
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Oh silly one, the courts did take it on...

You just are listening to fake news...

And your FAKE media, counted on you believing what they were saying, and not actually read all the court cases and what and why the judges ruled t h e way they did...

The State and federal courts didn't just say out of the clear blue, a case didn't have standing, or dismissed or denied....everything submitted was reviewed, state constitutions and election laws were reviewed, evidence presented was reviewed, all before the judges came to their rulings and they explained thoroughly why they ruled the way they did....
I reckon it all comes down to what media sources you want to believe.
Guy
Do you believe the ones that spouted Trump was a Putin puppet for the last 4 years with a full investigation that resulted in nothing, or do you believe the ones that said there was voter fraud, for which no one will investigate?

But then, now that news sources are being censored, now everyone only has your news sources, so now maybe everyone will start to believe the same thing.

In fact, I bet you still believe Trump is a Putin spy, don't you.
I read the 400 plus pages of the Mueller Report, so yes...I do believe the Russians interfered in our election and stole the DNC etc. Emails and do believe Trump and his campaign staff accepted their help with opened arms.... just as the investigation showed.

No, I did not just take Barr' s lipstick on a pig's word for it.

You have all the ability in the world to have NEWS stations/media/journalists, but you choose to go the FAKE NEWS route....

I personally prefer the fake newsers not be banned, so I can see what is being told to you, and I can know what you are thinking and where you are coming from.... and be able to debate your FAKE news with you! :)
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
12,731
Reaction score
1,742
Points
245
Location
Virginia
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Oh silly one, the courts did take it on...

You just are listening to fake news...

And your FAKE media, counted on you believing what they were saying, and not actually read all the court cases and what and why the judges ruled t h e way they did...

The State and federal courts didn't just say out of the clear blue, a case didn't have standing, or dismissed or denied....everything submitted was reviewed, state constitutions and election laws were reviewed, evidence presented was reviewed, all before the judges came to their rulings and they explained thoroughly why they ruled the way they did....
I reckon it all comes down to what media sources you want to believe.

Do you believe the ones that spouted Trump was a Putin puppet for the last 4 years with a full investigation that resulted in nothing, or do you believe the ones that said there was voter fraud, for which no one will investigate?

But then, now that news sources are being censored, now everyone only has your news sources, so now maybe everyone will start to believe the same thing.

In fact, I bet you still believe Trump is a Putin spy, don't you.
Probably not. Trump is not smart enough to be a Russian asset. Putin wouldn't trust him not to shoot off his mouth if he needed an attention fix.
It was strange, she thought, to obtain news by means of nothing but denials, as if existence had ceased, facts had vanished and only the frantic negatives uttered by officials and columnists gave any clue to the reality they were denying.

Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, 1957

People from the past saw this coming.

Just read 1984 and you would think it was today.
Rand lived in a fantasy world of her own making. Do you?
 

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
5,542
Reaction score
2,974
Points
940
Location
South Carolina
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Agreed.

The courts should have ignored the fact that there was no objective, documented evidence in support of ‘fraud’ and simply taken Trump’s lawyers’ word for it – scout’s honor.
How do you know what the evidence is if you refuse to hear it?
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
57,369
Reaction score
15,668
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Agreed.

The courts should have ignored the fact that there was no objective, documented evidence in support of ‘fraud’ and simply taken Trump’s lawyers’ word for it – scout’s honor.
How do you know what the evidence is if you refuse to hear it?
No one refused any evidence of voter fraud in the courts, there just was NO EVIDENCE presented to the courts on voter fraud.

(The courts do not accept accusations, or suppositions, without evidence)
 
Last edited:

Aletheia4u

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
6,551
Reaction score
1,076
Points
195
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Pres. Trump should not have let this case alone. It is because the culprit sees that if they can get away with one in front of the eyes of the public, that they can get away with it again.
He should have nip it in the bud before it grew and sprouted out into other states.


 

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
5,542
Reaction score
2,974
Points
940
Location
South Carolina
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Agreed.

The courts should have ignored the fact that there was no objective, documented evidence in support of ‘fraud’ and simply taken Trump’s lawyers’ word for it – scout’s honor.
How do you know what the evidence is if you refuse to hear it?
No one refused any evidence of voter fraud in the courts, there just was NO EVIDENCE presented to the courts on voter fraud.
If a judge dismisses a case he still hears the evidence? Since when?
 

citygator

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2019
Messages
3,311
Reaction score
2,337
Points
1,940
Location
Charlotte
If that’s what you think of your opposition, then I feel sorry for you.
No you don’t. Second, it’s easy to see the court filings and results. The post I responded to claimed basically they were all crooked or lacked courage. That is about as nutty as it gets. You agree?
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
57,369
Reaction score
15,668
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Agreed.

The courts should have ignored the fact that there was no objective, documented evidence in support of ‘fraud’ and simply taken Trump’s lawyers’ word for it – scout’s honor.
How do you know what the evidence is if you refuse to hear it?
No one refused any evidence of voter fraud in the courts, there just was NO EVIDENCE presented to the courts on voter fraud.
If a judge dismisses a case he still hears the evidence? Since when?
That's how the judge knows when to dismiss cases.... each side presents a summary of what they got....then the judge decides if the case moves forward or dismissed for various reasons.

The judge can not make the decision to dismiss without review of the case and evidence presented.

They just don't simply say "dismissed", the judges give a summary of WHY the cases and evidence was rejected.
 
Last edited:

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
74,129
Reaction score
16,046
Points
2,180
Trump's hand picked AG said there was no sizable voter fraud.
All Barr had to do was issue a report of what was investigated and what the findings were.
That said, the GOP got outplayed in GA. The Consent Decree was a coup for Stacy Abrams, as well as he sister's ruling on pruning ineligible voters from the rolls.
The GOP legislatures need to tighten-up voting laws or the dems will swamp every election with bogus mail-in votes.
Nope.

Vote by mail needs to be expanded. Five states have done it for a while and there has never been anyone who claimed the elections were illegitimate and there hasn't been any greater fraud in those elections than the other 45 states. So no..
 

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
5,542
Reaction score
2,974
Points
940
Location
South Carolina
If that’s what you think of your opposition, then I feel sorry for you.
No you don’t. Second, it’s easy to see the court filings and results. The post I responded to claimed basically they were all crooked or lacked courage. That is about as nutty as it gets. You agree?
What I think of the courts behavior is irrelevant...It's a new year, Trump is out.
 

citygator

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2019
Messages
3,311
Reaction score
2,337
Points
1,940
Location
Charlotte
If that’s what you think of your opposition, then I feel sorry for you.
No you don’t. Second, it’s easy to see the court filings and results. The post I responded to claimed basically they were all crooked or lacked courage. That is about as nutty as it gets. You agree?
What I think of the courts behavior is irrelevant...It's a new year, Trump is out.
a
Agreed. He is out. Fairly.
 

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
5,542
Reaction score
2,974
Points
940
Location
South Carolina
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Agreed.

The courts should have ignored the fact that there was no objective, documented evidence in support of ‘fraud’ and simply taken Trump’s lawyers’ word for it – scout’s honor.
How do you know what the evidence is if you refuse to hear it?
No one refused any evidence of voter fraud in the courts, there just was NO EVIDENCE presented to the courts on voter fraud.
If a judge dismisses a case he still hears the evidence? Since when?
That's how the judge knows when to dismiss cases.... each side presents a summary of what they got....then the judge decides if the case moves forward or dismissed for various reasons.

The judge can not make the decision to dismiss without review of the case and evidence presented.

They just don't simply say "dismissed", the judges give a summary of WHY the cases and evidence was rejected.
Ok, where can average people review these summaries?
 

colfax_m

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
22,256
Reaction score
7,063
Points
265
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
The courts did exactly what they’re supposed to do. They listened to the case, weighed the arguments and made a judgement.
The results were basically unanimous

You don’t want a process, you want an outcome.
 

colfax_m

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
22,256
Reaction score
7,063
Points
265
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
Agreed.

The courts should have ignored the fact that there was no objective, documented evidence in support of ‘fraud’ and simply taken Trump’s lawyers’ word for it – scout’s honor.
How do you know what the evidence is if you refuse to hear it?
No one refused any evidence of voter fraud in the courts, there just was NO EVIDENCE presented to the courts on voter fraud.
If a judge dismisses a case he still hears the evidence? Since when?
That's how the judge knows when to dismiss cases.... each side presents a summary of what they got....then the judge decides if the case moves forward or dismissed for various reasons.

The judge can not make the decision to dismiss without review of the case and evidence presented.

They just don't simply say "dismissed", the judges give a summary of WHY the cases and evidence was rejected.
Ok, where can average people review these summaries?
Democracy docket has compiled them.
 

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
5,542
Reaction score
2,974
Points
940
Location
South Carolina
If that’s what you think of your opposition, then I feel sorry for you.
No you don’t. Second, it’s easy to see the court filings and results. The post I responded to claimed basically they were all crooked or lacked courage. That is about as nutty as it gets. You agree?
What I think of the courts behavior is irrelevant...It's a new year, Trump is out.
a
Agreed. He is out. Fairly.
Fairly or not, it's now about Biden.
 

Oz and the Orchestra

Platinum Member
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
2,205
Reaction score
1,092
Points
918
Location
Lake District England
The courts should NOT have dismissed the voter fraud cases. They should have allowed them to approach the courts and with transparency show the American people it was either a concern or invalid.

They should have done this knowing if they did not, the nation would remain divided forever.

But perhaps this is what they really wanted all along.

And God forbid any of it might have gone Trumps way. That would have been unacceptable.
They wouldn't have, but trumpsters where too shit scared to go into court alleging voter "fraud" and instead alleged electoral wrongdoing.

Is it any surprise that Sidney Powell's allegations, that she has a friend, that knows one of the election officials, who said he saw one of the counters stuff votes down her knickers, were not taken seriously. indeed I heard one of the judges had a hernia trying to contain his laughter!
 

Lesh

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
22,931
Reaction score
6,202
Points
290
If they had JUST ONE half way decent lawyer who knew how to draft a pleading properly so that the case could get to the evidence phase then maybe things would have been different.
Or maybe they just didn't have a case to begin with.
There was a reason that the Trump lawyers were a joke.

No real lawyer would take such a nonsensical case. It was a career killer. Think about the arguments made. Pure idiocy and everyone knew it.

That leaves you with Krazy Kraken Lady, Lin QAnon Wood, and Roody Toot Toot.

Make no mistake. Many of those Republican appointed Judges and Justices would have loved to rule in Trump's favor. They couldn't. Not an maintain an ounce of respect
 

Lesh

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
22,931
Reaction score
6,202
Points
290
Trump's hand picked AG said there was no sizable voter fraud.
All Barr had to do was issue a report of what was investigated and what the findings were.
That said, the GOP got outplayed in GA. The Consent Decree was a coup for Stacy Abrams, as well as he sister's ruling on pruning ineligible voters from the rolls.
The GOP legislatures need to tighten-up voting laws or the dems will swamp every election with bogus mail-in votes.
Save us the conspiracy nonsense. You sound like one of the few Trumpers struggling to find truth in all this and you end up with watered down QAnon shit anyway.

Barr appointed Durham well before the election to help Trump get re-elected. Many at the time had such respect for Durham that they were shocked that Durham would become involved in such an endeavor.

Well Durham actually did do an investigation. A real one. And found nothing. That left Barr with nothing.

Stacey Abrams? Huh? She did a strong get out the vote program. There was noting nefarious about that

And her sister? Are you saying that judges can't rule on cases in which anyone they are at all close to have any involvement?

So that means that Justice Thomas must recuse from any case regarding abortion since his wife is so heavily involved in the anti-abortion movement. Do you think that's gonna happen?
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top