The courts should have taken on the voter fraud issue.

[busybee01]

For a cornucopia of reasons, no court (or judge) wanted anything to do with a hearing where documents were produced, witnesses testified under penalty of perjury, and a conclusion would have to be drawn on the legitimacy of an election. No matter the outcome, the judge would be - put it crudely - fucked.

I would like to see some hearings, in any forum, with those same characteristics. Real evidence presented and refuted, real witnesses testifying and being cross examined, and so on. That is why I placed all my eggs in the basked of a sane result in the Georgia runoffs. Now I fear that no such hearings will be held anywhere, especially in the affected states, even though some of them have "Republican" legislatures. The ramifications of an uncomfortable result would be too incendiary to risk.

In my opinion, this is the main reason why the Trump Nation is pissed. It's not so much that the election might have been stolen. It is that the requests and demands for meaningful investigations have been met not with consideration, but with abject DENIALS that nothing untoward took place, coupled with the the accusation that if you even question the shenanigans you are an evil person. And this is bullshit.

Shenanigans did take place. Laws were broken. Reasonable election security measures were jettisoned by Democrat operatives in venues that were known years in advance, all on the basis of the Cajuna Virus. We may never know whether the malfeasances tilted the outcome of the election, but the foul taste will linger forever.

Unfortunately, the Democrat strategy for 2022 and beyond is to make a majority of the voting public either dependent on government or oblivious to reality can neuter the votes of the Americans who actually work for a living in the private sector - the core of the Trump Nation, making our anger meaningless.

That is untrue. Trump's attorneys were free to submit any evidence they wanted to in support of their motion. Trump lawyers have admitted they have no evidence and have said they are not claiming voter fraud. Trump's lawyers are free to submit evidence in support of their motion if they desire. The results in the Georgia Senate run-offs were sane. They were almost identical to the Presidential races which indicates they have a problem statewide in Georgia. It is all due to suburban voters.

Trump Nation is pissed because Trump lost. You people cannot accept the truth. There can be no investigation when there is no evidence.

No shenanigans took place and no laws were broken. No election security measures were jettisoned.

The Democrats should ask one question in 2022. Do you want to give the people who tried to steal the election more power?

 

[busybee01]

All they had to do was prove the election was void of fraud...and they refused....blocked attempts at every turn...anti Trump secretaries of state and blue state governors and justices appointed by Clinton Bush and Obama (establishment hacks) blocked them all....its a damn shame...the people of the United States of America can no longer have faith in their election system....

Judges appointed by Trump also found no merit to Trump's legal arguments. They are not hacks because they refused to do what you wanted them to do. SOS are not anti-Trump because they refused to cheat for him. Red state governors also refused to cheat for Trump.

The entire judicial system was against Trump and his policies from the start...so I'm not surprised...the maddening thing is they never looked at the evidence...we have not had a single evidentiary trial...not one judge in the entire United States has viewed any evidence....

And that is just not fair to the voters of America....and its also why the Trump voters will not be silenced....all they had to do was to recount and check every signature and corresponding envelopes in 6 blue counties....they refused and so there was trouble....the courts have themselves to blame for the riot at the capitol....

Get a new line. The judiciary was not against Trump. Maybe you have no problem with ignoring the Constitution but I do. Trump undertook various policies without getting congressional approval.

 

[BULLDOG]

Is there any part of our 3 branches of government that you believe in?

Absolutely not.

We have deviated so far from our founding principles.

The ONLY thing that would return faith is the institution of term limits and age restrictions.

Was that a yes or a no? Do you support the constitution or not?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

That saying "trust, but verify" applies well here. A lot of what I know about his cases are from what has been reported in the news because after several significant dismissals the media was quoting portions of the judge's determination and few of them I looked up and verified myself.

Trump's team pled a myriad of allegations, anything and everything they could think of including discrimination in one case and in another the state of Texas objected to the way that another state (Pennsylvania if I recall correctly) conducted it's election (image any other state trying to dictate to Texas how Texas conducts any of it's business) but they all asked that the election results be nullified and the win handed to Trump.

This article is a good one in which it explains what the judges said in this particular case and more importantly WHY they ruled as they did.

​

By

Robert Barnes and​

Elise Viebeck​

Dec. 1, 2020 at 2:36 p.m. PST​

President Trump’s allies said Tuesday that they have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block a decision by Pennsylvania’s highest court dismissing a challenge of the state’s mail-in voting system.

The lawsuit is one of many protesting the results in the swing state’s elections, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Saturday said that the suit’s “extraordinary” request to throw out millions of ballots came too late.

The Republican lawsuit challenged Act 77, the 2019 statute in Pennsylvania that allows voters to cast mail ballots for any reason. Their argument is that the law, passed by the Republican-led legislature and signed by the state’s Democratic governor, violated the state constitution’s requirements on who could receive a mail-in ballot.

Trump’s allies asked the state court to invalidate all votes cast by mail in the general election — more than 2.5 million in total — or direct the state legislature to appoint its own slate of presidential electors.

Since Nov. 4, President Trump has repeatedly claimed his election loss a result of massive fraud. The following is a round-up of his claims. (The Washington Post)

The state Supreme Court dismissed the case on Saturday, ruling that petitioners waited more than a year to sue, and only then after the results of the election were clear.
“The want of due diligence demonstrated in this matter is unmistakable,” the justices wrote, noting that some of the petitioners included candidates for office who had urged supporters to cast their ballots by mail.

The order blamed petitioners for a “complete failure to act with due diligence in commencing their facial constitutional challenge, which was ascertainable upon Act 77’s enactment.”

The filing aimed at the U.S. Supreme Court asks the justices to stop any further certification of the Pennsylvania vote. It is directed to Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who is the justice responsible for receiving emergency requests from the region.

Generally, the U.S. Supreme Court does not second-guess state courts when they are interpreting their own constitutions.

But the petitioners, led by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), said that without the justices’ intervention, the commonwealth “will take further actions to certify the results of the election, potentially limiting this court’s ability to grant relief in the event of a decision on the merits in petitioners’ favor.”

The chief justice and one other justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court expressed some concern about the law, which contained a 180-day window in which objections could be filed. But both said there was no reason to grant the extraordinary relief challengers sought.

Another said it was clearly too late to bring those challenges now.

“Having delayed this suit until two elections were conducted under Act 77’s new, no-excuse mail-in voting system, petitioners — several of whom participated in primary elections under this system without complaint — play a dangerous game at the expense of every Pennsylvania voter,” wrote Justice David Wecht, a Democrat.

He said the petitioners want to change the rules after the election.

“It is not our role to lend legitimacy to such transparent and untimely efforts to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters,” Wecht wrote. “Courts should not decide elections when the will of the voters is clear.”​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1b077e-3403-11eb-a997-1f4c53d2a747_story.html​

 

[Turtlesoup]

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.

Donald Trump should STOP lying to the American people and tell the truth. And so should all Republican leaders and officials. Donald Trump should have never lied to the people in the first place. There was never any questio of fraud in the election. Trump made that up.

Donald Trump lost the election fair and square.

Fraudulent votes is NOT fair and square....maybe to communists it is--but to everyone else no.

 

[task0778]

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....

"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...."

Do you or anyone else have a link to back this claim up? Cuz I heard the opposite. So I'm asking, does anyone have a link that support this claim?

 

[BULLDOG]

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....

"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...."

Do you or anyone else have a link to back this claim up? Cuz I heard the opposite. So I'm asking, does anyone have a link that support this claim?

I'm, sure you did hear the opposite. Crazy right wing sources are bad about lying or just not telling the parts they don't want you to hear.

 

[busybee01]

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.

In spite of efforts my the mainsleaze media to suppress it, there is content all over the smaller, but less censored media, showing what appear to be many diverse instances of what undeniably constitute serious irregularities in the election process. It would be a rather extreme stretch to deny that if these irregularities are as presented, that they constitute anything but outright cheating.

In rejecting attempts to litigate over these irregularities, I don't think one court ever addressed any of this evidence itself; or made any attempt to determine whether an of it is genuine or legitimate. They all cited various jurisdictional and technical issues in rejecting the cases, which had nothing to do with the actual merits of any case. I think I even faintly remember reading of one judge rejecting the case on the basis that a ruling the “wrong” way might lead to rioting and violence from the side that doesn't favor such a ruling.

So we are left with what appears to be a widespread pattern of cheating, and an apparent collusion of deliberate nonfeasance on the part of the courts in refusing to do their job in addressing this pattern.

So, what are any of us to think with regard to the legitimacy of this last election? Maybe what appears to be cheating isn't really, and would have been properly shown to be legitimate, under proper examination, or perhaps even show to have been fabricated. Maybe cheating would have been confirmed, but shown not to be enough to change the outcome of the election. Or perhaps cheating would have been confirmed, and shown to have changed the outcome.

In any event, we probably won't ever know. But the pattern of censorship by the media, and of nonfeasance by the courts, is certainly very suspicious, beyond the degree to which the direct evidence itself of cheating is.

There is no evidence of this. Just because someone says it happened does not mean it happened. For example, the number of votes cast roughly equals the number of voters. That means that anyone who is claiming extra votes were scanned is a liar.

The courts addressed any evidence that was presented. Trump lawyers said they had no evidence of fraud and were not even claiming fraud. They were free to present any evidence they had of fraud. They failed to do so. Thast is why the cases were dismissed.

What we are left with is the fact that you cannot accept the fact that Trump lost. you must have something else to hang your hat on. Voter fraud becomes what you hang your hat on.

 

[Care4all]

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....

"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...."

Do you or anyone else have a link to back this claim up? Cuz I heard the opposite. So I'm asking, does anyone have a link that support this claim?

Here are some of them...scroll down....

Here's Every Trump Campaign Lawsuit Filed Since Election Day

Trump's campaign blitzed U.S. courts with new lawsuits this week. Judges have so far rejected most of them.

time.com

]

 

[j-mac]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

Yes, after the fact it is harder to research it. But what I do, that makes it easy peasey, is when a thread here is started on Trump team lost or won in court....the news link to the story from all the reputable news sources, gives you a link in their article to the court case....and I read it right then.... that way I do not have to search for it some time later...

Fair enough, but when you say "reputable news sources" in this day and age can mean only that you are limiting yourself to outlets that have a track record in the past 4 years of misleading you....Or worse yet lying by ommision, or making things up out of whole cloth....

The only way to get the true opinion from the Judge in question is to read it, if you can get to it....

But, as I suspect you are not alone...Most people are reading articles that have a vested stake in writing stories in favor of their personal feeling of outcome....

As I said, any reputable news organization, like the main stream media, will give you a link to the actual court case and judge's filing summary, there for you to read it all.

I doubt the fake news like OAN, or Newsmax, or Breitbart, or The Gateway Pundit or any TRUMP news internet site, will give you the link to the court case.

The mainstream media in print, do not lie as you claim...They would lose their licence....whereas YOUR FAKE news media listed above, have no restraints on lying or creating total fabrications out of whole cloth.

If the mainstream press lies in a news article, they have to formally retract the story and let their customers know, they were incorrect.

Without derailing this thread, we'll have to discuss media bias in another thread...I welcome the opprotunity to debate that subject with you should you want to discuss it further...

at this point in here we will have to agree to disagree...

 

[j-mac]

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.

In spite of efforts my the mainsleaze media to suppress it, there is content all over the smaller, but less censored media, showing what appear to be many diverse instances of what undeniably constitute serious irregularities in the election process. It would be a rather extreme stretch to deny that if these irregularities are as presented, that they constitute anything but outright cheating.

In rejecting attempts to litigate over these irregularities, I don't think one court ever addressed any of this evidence itself; or made any attempt to determine whether an of it is genuine or legitimate. They all cited various jurisdictional and technical issues in rejecting the cases, which had nothing to do with the actual merits of any case. I think I even faintly remember reading of one judge rejecting the case on the basis that a ruling the “wrong” way might lead to rioting and violence from the side that doesn't favor such a ruling.

So we are left with what appears to be a widespread pattern of cheating, and an apparent collusion of deliberate nonfeasance on the part of the courts in refusing to do their job in addressing this pattern.

So, what are any of us to think with regard to the legitimacy of this last election? Maybe what appears to be cheating isn't really, and would have been properly shown to be legitimate, under proper examination, or perhaps even show to have been fabricated. Maybe cheating would have been confirmed, but shown not to be enough to change the outcome of the election. Or perhaps cheating would have been confirmed, and shown to have changed the outcome.

In any event, we probably won't ever know. But the pattern of censorship by the media, and of nonfeasance by the courts, is certainly very suspicious, beyond the degree to which the direct evidence itself of cheating is.

There is no evidence of this. Just because someone says it happened does not mean it happened. For example, the number of votes cast roughly equals the number of voters. That means that anyone who is claiming extra votes were scanned is a liar.

The courts addressed any evidence that was presented. Trump lawyers said they had no evidence of fraud and were not even claiming fraud. They were free to present any evidence they had of fraud. They failed to do so. Thast is why the cases were dismissed.

What we are left with is the fact that you cannot accept the fact that Trump lost. you must have something else to hang your hat on. Voter fraud becomes what you hang your hat on.

I think at this point the fact that Trump is transfering power of the Presidency to Biden next Wednesday is a foregone conclusion...However, that the election is settled, doesn't mean that irregularities didn't occur, nor does it mean that the states in question followed their constitutions in having the legislature change rules prior to the election...

What it does mean is that Republican's will now have to play the same games Democrats do...So, when this happens to Democrats I look forward to the claims of unconstitutionality coming from them....

 

[j-mac]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

Yes, after the fact it is harder to research it. But what I do, that makes it easy peasey, is when a thread here is started on Trump team lost or won in court....the news link to the story from all the reputable news sources, gives you a link in their article to the court case....and I read it right then.... that way I do not have to search for it some time later...

Fair enough, but when you say "reputable news sources" in this day and age can mean only that you are limiting yourself to outlets that have a track record in the past 4 years of misleading you....Or worse yet lying by ommision, or making things up out of whole cloth....

The only way to get the true opinion from the Judge in question is to read it, if you can get to it....

But, as I suspect you are not alone...Most people are reading articles that have a vested stake in writing stories in favor of their personal feeling of outcome....

As I said, any reputable news organization, like the main stream media, will give you a link to the actual court case and judge's filing summary, there for you to read it all.

I doubt the fake news like OAN, or Newsmax, or Breitbart, or The Gateway Pundit or any TRUMP news internet site, will give you the link to the court case.

The mainstream media in print, do not lie as you claim...They would lose their licence....whereas YOUR FAKE news media listed above, have no restraints on lying or creating total fabrications out of whole cloth.

If the mainstream press lies in a news article, they have to formally retract the story and let their customers know, they were incorrect.

You're so fulla shit it is coming out my ears.

I believe that she really believes that...However, I don't expect that when alone, and watching CNN or MSNBC that she agrees with everything they put out there....Same goes for print media....

Ya know, it's funny how liberals can screech endlessly about how Conservatives are so brainwashed by Fox News, and Talk Radio, when in reading their postings in here, many could have been written by Maddow, Lemon, or Cuomo word for word...

 

[j-mac]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

That saying "trust, but verify" applies well here. A lot of what I know about his cases are from what has been reported in the news because after several significant dismissals the media was quoting portions of the judge's determination and few of them I looked up and verified myself.

Trump's team pled a myriad of allegations, anything and everything they could think of including discrimination in one case and in another the state of Texas objected to the way that another state (Pennsylvania if I recall correctly) conducted it's election (image any other state trying to dictate to Texas how Texas conducts any of it's business) but they all asked that the election results be nullified and the win handed to Trump.

This article is a good one in which it explains what the judges said in this particular case and more importantly WHY they ruled as they did.

​

By​

Robert Barnes and​

Elise Viebeck​

Dec. 1, 2020 at 2:36 p.m. PST​

​

President Trump’s allies said Tuesday that they have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block a decision by Pennsylvania’s highest court dismissing a challenge of the state’s mail-in voting system.​

​

The lawsuit is one of many protesting the results in the swing state’s elections, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Saturday said that the suit’s “extraordinary” request to throw out millions of ballots came too late.​

​

The Republican lawsuit challenged Act 77, the 2019 statute in Pennsylvania that allows voters to cast mail ballots for any reason. Their argument is that the law, passed by the Republican-led legislature and signed by the state’s Democratic governor, violated the state constitution’s requirements on who could receive a mail-in ballot.​

​

Trump’s allies asked the state court to invalidate all votes cast by mail in the general election — more than 2.5 million in total — or direct the state legislature to appoint its own slate of presidential electors.​

​

Since Nov. 4, President Trump has repeatedly claimed his election loss a result of massive fraud. The following is a round-up of his claims. (The Washington Post)​

​

The state Supreme Court dismissed the case on Saturday, ruling that petitioners waited more than a year to sue, and only then after the results of the election were clear.​

“The want of due diligence demonstrated in this matter is unmistakable,” the justices wrote, noting that some of the petitioners included candidates for office who had urged supporters to cast their ballots by mail.​

​

The order blamed petitioners for a “complete failure to act with due diligence in commencing their facial constitutional challenge, which was ascertainable upon Act 77’s enactment.”​

​

The filing aimed at the U.S. Supreme Court asks the justices to stop any further certification of the Pennsylvania vote. It is directed to Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who is the justice responsible for receiving emergency requests from the region.​

​

Generally, the U.S. Supreme Court does not second-guess state courts when they are interpreting their own constitutions.​

​

But the petitioners, led by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), said that without the justices’ intervention, the commonwealth “will take further actions to certify the results of the election, potentially limiting this court’s ability to grant relief in the event of a decision on the merits in petitioners’ favor.”​

​

The chief justice and one other justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court expressed some concern about the law, which contained a 180-day window in which objections could be filed. But both said there was no reason to grant the extraordinary relief challengers sought.​

​

Another said it was clearly too late to bring those challenges now.​

​

“Having delayed this suit until two elections were conducted under Act 77’s new, no-excuse mail-in voting system, petitioners — several of whom participated in primary elections under this system without complaint — play a dangerous game at the expense of every Pennsylvania voter,” wrote Justice David Wecht, a Democrat.​

​

He said the petitioners want to change the rules after the election.​

​

“It is not our role to lend legitimacy to such transparent and untimely efforts to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters,” Wecht wrote. “Courts should not decide elections when the will of the voters is clear.”​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1b077e-3403-11eb-a997-1f4c53d2a747_story.html​

That's all fine and dandy....But I'd be willing to bet a weeks pay that the WaPo would have a different take had this benifited Trump instead of hurt him....

 

[Bob Blaylock]

There is no evidence of this. Just because someone says it happened does not mean it happened.

Refusing to look at the evidence, or to acknowledge that it exists, does not make it go away.

 

[Kondor3]

No...

The courts should NOT have taken-on the voter fraud issue...

Congress certainly can, and perhaps they should, just for grins-and-giggles...

But it was far more important to get the aspiring insane Dictator-wannabe out of the seat of power as quickly as possible...

We can bat clean-up on the rest of it once they've taken the Launch Codes away from the Orange Crazyman.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

Yes, after the fact it is harder to research it. But what I do, that makes it easy peasey, is when a thread here is started on Trump team lost or won in court....the news link to the story from all the reputable news sources, gives you a link in their article to the court case....and I read it right then.... that way I do not have to search for it some time later...

Fair enough, but when you say "reputable news sources" in this day and age can mean only that you are limiting yourself to outlets that have a track record in the past 4 years of misleading you....Or worse yet lying by ommision, or making things up out of whole cloth....

The only way to get the true opinion from the Judge in question is to read it, if you can get to it....

But, as I suspect you are not alone...Most people are reading articles that have a vested stake in writing stories in favor of their personal feeling of outcome....

As I said, any reputable news organization, like the main stream media, will give you a link to the actual court case and judge's filing summary, there for you to read it all.

I doubt the fake news like OAN, or Newsmax, or Breitbart, or The Gateway Pundit or any TRUMP news internet site, will give you the link to the court case.

The mainstream media in print, do not lie as you claim...They would lose their licence....whereas YOUR FAKE news media listed above, have no restraints on lying or creating total fabrications out of whole cloth.

If the mainstream press lies in a news article, they have to formally retract the story and let their customers know, they were incorrect.

You're so fulla shit it is coming out my ears.

I believe that she really believes that...However, I don't expect that when alone, and watching CNN or MSNBC that she agrees with everything they put out there....Same goes for print media....

Ya know, it's funny how liberals can screech endlessly about how Conservatives are so brainwashed by Fox News, and Talk Radio, when in reading their postings in here, many could have been written by Maddow, Lemon, or Cuomo word for word...

All liberals are now tangled in a web of lies and deception. Gotta play it through.

I wonder how much of Hollywood believes opposite of what their told to believe in.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

That saying "trust, but verify" applies well here. A lot of what I know about his cases are from what has been reported in the news because after several significant dismissals the media was quoting portions of the judge's determination and few of them I looked up and verified myself.

Trump's team pled a myriad of allegations, anything and everything they could think of including discrimination in one case and in another the state of Texas objected to the way that another state (Pennsylvania if I recall correctly) conducted it's election (image any other state trying to dictate to Texas how Texas conducts any of it's business) but they all asked that the election results be nullified and the win handed to Trump.

This article is a good one in which it explains what the judges said in this particular case and more importantly WHY they ruled as they did.

​

By​

Robert Barnes and​

Elise Viebeck​

Dec. 1, 2020 at 2:36 p.m. PST​

​

President Trump’s allies said Tuesday that they have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to block a decision by Pennsylvania’s highest court dismissing a challenge of the state’s mail-in voting system.​

​

The lawsuit is one of many protesting the results in the swing state’s elections, and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Saturday said that the suit’s “extraordinary” request to throw out millions of ballots came too late.​

​

The Republican lawsuit challenged Act 77, the 2019 statute in Pennsylvania that allows voters to cast mail ballots for any reason. Their argument is that the law, passed by the Republican-led legislature and signed by the state’s Democratic governor, violated the state constitution’s requirements on who could receive a mail-in ballot.​

​

Trump’s allies asked the state court to invalidate all votes cast by mail in the general election — more than 2.5 million in total — or direct the state legislature to appoint its own slate of presidential electors.​

​

Since Nov. 4, President Trump has repeatedly claimed his election loss a result of massive fraud. The following is a round-up of his claims. (The Washington Post)​

​

The state Supreme Court dismissed the case on Saturday, ruling that petitioners waited more than a year to sue, and only then after the results of the election were clear.​

“The want of due diligence demonstrated in this matter is unmistakable,” the justices wrote, noting that some of the petitioners included candidates for office who had urged supporters to cast their ballots by mail.​

​

The order blamed petitioners for a “complete failure to act with due diligence in commencing their facial constitutional challenge, which was ascertainable upon Act 77’s enactment.”​

​

The filing aimed at the U.S. Supreme Court asks the justices to stop any further certification of the Pennsylvania vote. It is directed to Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who is the justice responsible for receiving emergency requests from the region.​

​

Generally, the U.S. Supreme Court does not second-guess state courts when they are interpreting their own constitutions.​

​

But the petitioners, led by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), said that without the justices’ intervention, the commonwealth “will take further actions to certify the results of the election, potentially limiting this court’s ability to grant relief in the event of a decision on the merits in petitioners’ favor.”​

​

The chief justice and one other justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court expressed some concern about the law, which contained a 180-day window in which objections could be filed. But both said there was no reason to grant the extraordinary relief challengers sought.​

​

Another said it was clearly too late to bring those challenges now.​

​

“Having delayed this suit until two elections were conducted under Act 77’s new, no-excuse mail-in voting system, petitioners — several of whom participated in primary elections under this system without complaint — play a dangerous game at the expense of every Pennsylvania voter,” wrote Justice David Wecht, a Democrat.​

​

He said the petitioners want to change the rules after the election.​

​

“It is not our role to lend legitimacy to such transparent and untimely efforts to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters,” Wecht wrote. “Courts should not decide elections when the will of the voters is clear.”​

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1b077e-3403-11eb-a997-1f4c53d2a747_story.html​

That's all fine and dandy....But I'd be willing to bet a weeks pay that the WaPo would have a different take had this benifited Trump instead of hurt him....

So which news outlet would you trust to do the legal analysis?

 

[Care4all]

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?

PACER is the official U.S. site, they charge for downloading/printing copies of the documents but it's not a lot, I think maybe 10 cents a page.
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER)

This site is free but there have been cases I've been unable to locate nonetheless I'd start here first, search on the information you have and if you still can't find it, then you can use the paid site:
Leagle Case Search

There is also LexisNexis for they are a bit pricey in my opinion and you might have to work in certain industries in order to get access to their databases, but I could be wrong about that last bit:
Welcome to LexisNexis - Choose Your Path

You can always go to the courthouse where the case was filed and get a copy of the docket & case files, even better if they have them online but that would be a lot of work since Trump et al have been rebuked, what is it, more than 70 times already?

Great information, thanks....So, the bottom line from what I am reading, is that it would take a fair bit of research to find out what particular Judges have said in their opinions for dismissing individual cases...Something I can make a fair bet that no one in here has done...So, when people are thowing out blanket statements like "All the courts have decided that the cases had no merit", that is something that would need more time in research than I am sure anyone has done.

Yes, after the fact it is harder to research it. But what I do, that makes it easy peasey, is when a thread here is started on Trump team lost or won in court....the news link to the story from all the reputable news sources, gives you a link in their article to the court case....and I read it right then.... that way I do not have to search for it some time later...

Fair enough, but when you say "reputable news sources" in this day and age can mean only that you are limiting yourself to outlets that have a track record in the past 4 years of misleading you....Or worse yet lying by ommision, or making things up out of whole cloth....

The only way to get the true opinion from the Judge in question is to read it, if you can get to it....

But, as I suspect you are not alone...Most people are reading articles that have a vested stake in writing stories in favor of their personal feeling of outcome....

As I said, any reputable news organization, like the main stream media, will give you a link to the actual court case and judge's filing summary, there for you to read it all.

I doubt the fake news like OAN, or Newsmax, or Breitbart, or The Gateway Pundit or any TRUMP news internet site, will give you the link to the court case.

The mainstream media in print, do not lie as you claim...They would lose their licence....whereas YOUR FAKE news media listed above, have no restraints on lying or creating total fabrications out of whole cloth.

If the mainstream press lies in a news article, they have to formally retract the story and let their customers know, they were incorrect.

You're so fulla shit it is coming out my ears.

I believe that she really believes that...However, I don't expect that when alone, and watching CNN or MSNBC that she agrees with everything they put out there....Same goes for print media....

Ya know, it's funny how liberals can screech endlessly about how Conservatives are so brainwashed by Fox News, and Talk Radio, when in reading their postings in here, many could have been written by Maddow, Lemon, or Cuomo word for word...

thanks, i do believe what i believe!

but I watch your most visceral hosts on Fox as well, Judge Jeanine, Maria Bartiromo, Lou Dobbs, Hannity and Tucker on occaision in order to know what hate or falsities or whataboutisms your side is pushing!

I do not ever watch newsmax or OANN..... that's just too much bullcrap fake news to swallow for me!

Correct, I do not believe all of the left winger OPINIONS their media spouts, I can recognize it is biased opinion of the News of the day....while still recognizing, the news itself, is factual.

 

[BertramN]

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.

A court of law, any court of law requires evidence. There was no evidence presented to any of the courts, they heard only the ravings of the plaintiff's attorney(s), and no credible witnesses were presented.

Just because the courts didn't throw out the rules of evidence for you RWNJs, doesn't mean the cases were heard by operatives of "the Deep State". Some of the presiding judges were appointed by your beloved weasel-in-chief, and they threw the cases out of their courts, due to a lack of... e-v-i-d-e-n-c-e. You got that, a lack of EVIDENCE.

Get used to it, Biden won the election in a legitimate LANDSLIDE! Your weasel-in-chief is a loser and always has been.

(Only a weasel would throw the insurgents he sent to the Capitol to attempt his coup, under the bus by blaming them for everything, AND saying they should be severely punished.)

.

 

[Mac1958]

For a cornucopia of reasons, no court (or judge) wanted anything to do with a hearing where documents were produced, witnesses testified under penalty of perjury, and a conclusion would have to be drawn on the legitimacy of an election. No matter the outcome, the judge would be - put it crudely - fucked.

I would like to see some hearings, in any forum, with those same characteristics. Real evidence presented and refuted, real witnesses testifying and being cross examined, and so on. That is why I placed all my eggs in the basked of a sane result in the Georgia runoffs. Now I fear that no such hearings will be held anywhere, especially in the affected states, even though some of them have "Republican" legislatures. The ramifications of an uncomfortable result would be too incendiary to risk.

In my opinion, this is the main reason why the Trump Nation is pissed. It's not so much that the election might have been stolen. It is that the requests and demands for meaningful investigations have been met not with consideration, but with abject DENIALS that nothing untoward took place, coupled with the the accusation that if you even question the shenanigans you are an evil person. And this is bullshit.

Shenanigans did take place. Laws were broken. Reasonable election security measures were jettisoned by Democrat operatives in venues that were known years in advance, all on the basis of the Cajuna Virus. We may never know whether the malfeasances tilted the outcome of the election, but the foul taste will linger forever.

Unfortunately, the Democrat strategy for 2022 and beyond is to make a majority of the voting public either dependent on government or oblivious to reality can neuter the votes of the Americans who actually work for a living in the private sector - the core of the Trump Nation, making our anger meaningless.

That is untrue. Trump's attorneys were free to submit any evidence they wanted to in support of their motion. Trump lawyers have admitted they have no evidence and have said they are not claiming voter fraud. Trump's lawyers are free to submit evidence in support of their motion if they desire. The results in the Georgia Senate run-offs were sane. They were almost identical to the Presidential races which indicates they have a problem statewide in Georgia. It is all due to suburban voters.

Trump Nation is pissed because Trump lost. You people cannot accept the truth. There can be no investigation when there is no evidence.

No shenanigans took place and no laws were broken. No election security measures were jettisoned.

The Democrats should ask one question in 2022. Do you want to give the people who tried to steal the election more power?

I admire your patience.