The Fairness of the election

[martybegan]

Lets investigate and find out. You are thinking this is an episode of Law and Order, 1 hour to figure it all out.

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence of possible issues, and a lot of the country agrees with me.

Of course lefties like you will just resort to oppression and "re-education" like you Stalinesque fuckholes always do.

No, there is nothing to investigate. 55 lawsuits later should tell you something. A lot of those that have been dismissed have been done so by Trump appointed judges. Is that telling you anything? At all?
There is no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise. Why do you think the lawsuits have been kicked to the kerb?

And just so you know, and I'm absolutely serious about this - an Orange Man yelling at the top of his voice "fraud!!!" is not evidence.

Oh, so now you have a caveat. If you throw your toys out the cot and throw a tantie, and you are told to 'grow the fuck up' that is Stalinesque??? Ha!!! Loser....

There is no evidence yet. Most Judges wouldn't have the stomach to vote this quickly on that stuff anyway. But keep calling for no investigations.

Yelling NO FRAUD DONT INVESTIGATE doesn't placate me, or millions of others.

Fuck off you quisling SJW soi boi cuck.

 

[Dr Grump]

There is no evidence yet. Most Judges wouldn't have the stomach to vote this quickly on that stuff anyway. But keep calling for no investigations.

Yelling NO FRAUD DONT INVESTIGATE doesn't placate me, or millions of others.

Fuck off you quisling SJW soi boi cuck.

Yeah, you're just some butthurt nimrod on a messageboard. That's all you are.
I couldn't give two shits if you are placated or not. I want you guys to grab your peashooters and take on the armed forces. The end result will be a massive rise in the IQ of the US.
You can go fuck yourself you Hitler Youth wannabe loser..

 

[Arresmillao]

Not even those who have access to all the information and are suing are saying that the election was stolen.
It's now about the process. Even the right-wing loons suing are saying - "yes, they voted, and there was no fraud, however, were they allowed to vote in the manner that they voted?" That is the crux.

And when it really comes down to it, who cares how they voted? It only matters that they get their constitutional right to have their say, right?
You would disenfranchise millions of votes (including Trump ones BTW) just because you don't like the way they voted? Do you think that is fair? Is that morally, ethically right? Any right minded person would say no, it is not fair to disenfranchise them. .
And to double down, the reason there were so many mail in ballots in the first place, was because the guy doing all the whining now about the result (Trump) royally fucked up the COVID response. He has never taken responsibility for anything going pear shaped in his life. Yet his Deplorables lap it up. These are the same people who are ALWAYS rambling on about the blacks and the hispanics and the poor and the dumb need to take responsibility for their lives, yet their champion is the antithesis of this. This is why you are the world's joke and people laugh at you all the time.

The election is fraudulent. If the states aren't held to account for their breaking of their own laws according to their constitutions, they will do it again, and more brazenly in the next election.

whatever makes you happy deplorable, but the fact is Biden is your president and you have to suck it up...

 

[martybegan]

There is no evidence yet. Most Judges wouldn't have the stomach to vote this quickly on that stuff anyway. But keep calling for no investigations.

Yelling NO FRAUD DONT INVESTIGATE doesn't placate me, or millions of others.

Fuck off you quisling SJW soi boi cuck.

Yeah, you're just some butthurt nimrod on a messageboard. That's all you are.
I couldn't give two shits if you are placated or not. I want you guys to grab your peashooters and take on the armed forces. The end result will be a massive rise in the IQ of the US.
You can go fuck yourself you Hitler Youth wannabe loser..

What does that make you, some idiot responding?

HAHA you went Godwin! you lose!

Your patrician disdain for your fellow citizens is also noted, you low IQ gutter wench.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What laws were violated?

The deadline dates were violated. In PA, the law is all ballots have to be in by 8:00 pm EST. A judge willy nilly decided to extend that date by three days after the election. You can't do that. The legislatures are the only people that create or change laws in our country.

 

[dblack]

The election is fraudulent.

The only fraud here is Trump and his idiot followers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Having a ID is "hard"?

When you are of a certain colour, or social economic group, it has been proven over and over again, that yes, it is hard.

Bull. If you told anyone of these people that claim it's too difficult to get an ID, that there's a $1,000 check for them on the other side of the state, and all they had to do is get a valid ID to claim it, they would have that ID and check in less than six hours.

 

[RodISHI]

Stuffing ballot boxes with irregular votes is fraud regardless of how it is done. That has been shown over and over again recently; and very noticible, testified to in hearings. Now whether the filing processes have hit that aspect yet or not I cannot say but I am certain beyond a doubt that the irregularities have been over whelming that have been brought forth for the people to see.

The court filing processes never got that far ... the cases were dismissed due to a lack of evidence ...

That's your problem ... folks who claim to have seen fraud refuse to testify in court ... there's prison time for perjury ... testimony that deserves hostile cross-examination ...

No legal evidence of fraud ... funny how "law-and-order" conservatives don't seem to know what law and order is ... all sitting judges throughout the land are being paid to throw the election ... NASA grade CT ...

Courts refusing to look at evidence or allow a case to continue onto the discovery phase does not mean that fraud is not there.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's not correct. The SC has pretty much said they're hands off to states passing laws governing their own elections. The OP is correct that REPUBLICAN legislatures passed mail in voting, and the dems used it. In the past Republican legislatures suppressed dem votes by closing polling places, purging voter rolls and basically making it hard to vote in person.

Polling places are determined by the county election board. If Democrats were disenfranchised by polling places closing, it's likely Democrats are the people who did it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The court filing processes never got that far ... the cases were dismissed due to a lack of evidence ...

That's your problem ... folks who claim to have seen fraud refuse to testify in court ... there's prison time for perjury ... testimony that deserves hostile cross-examination ...

No legal evidence of fraud ... funny how "law-and-order" conservatives don't seem to know what law and order is ... all sitting judges throughout the land are being paid to throw the election ... NASA grade CT ...

Nobody refused to testify in court because no court would hear their testimony. Signing an affidavit (which team Trump had over 1,000 of) is subject to penalties including jail if you perjured yourself.

 

[BluesLegend]

Not even those who have access to all the information and are suing are saying that the election was stolen.

Math and science strongly support the election was likely stolen to the point of it being scientifically implausible that it wasn't stolen.

Total. Utter. Bullshit.

Historical rejection rate for mail in ballots in certain Dem districts is 3% yet this election only .1% a 30 fold swing and statistically impossible.

 

[Shawnee_b]

Not even those who have access to all the information and are suing are saying that the election was stolen.
It's now about the process. Even the right-wing loons suing are saying - "yes, they voted, and there was no fraud, however, were they allowed to vote in the manner that they voted?" That is the crux.

And when it really comes down to it, who cares how they voted? It only matters that they get their constitutional right to have their say, right?
You would disenfranchise millions of votes (including Trump ones BTW) just because you don't like the way they voted? Do you think that is fair? Is that morally, ethically right? Any right minded person would say no, it is not fair to disenfranchise them. .
And to double down, the reason there were so many mail in ballots in the first place, was because the guy doing all the whining now about the result (Trump) royally fucked up the COVID response. He has never taken responsibility for anything going pear shaped in his life. Yet his Deplorables lap it up. These are the same people who are ALWAYS rambling on about the blacks and the hispanics and the poor and the dumb need to take responsibility for their lives, yet their champion is the antithesis of this. This is why you are the world's joke and people laugh at you all the time.

Go lick someones nuts.

 

[ReinyDays]

Courts refusing to look at evidence or allow a case to continue onto the discovery phase does not mean that fraud is not there.

But it does mean the evidence does not rise to the level of being legally admissible ... you'd think "law-and-order" conservatives would respect that ...

 

[Dr Grump]

What does that make you, some idiot responding?

HAHA you went Godwin! you lose!

Your patrician disdain for your fellow citizens is also noted, you low IQ gutter wench.

Absolutely. We're all idiots with an opinion. What? You think your opinion matters?? RATFLMAO!!! You, like me, are just some Neville Nobody on a messageboard. What? You thought you were special?
They are not my citizens. I'd put my IQ up against yours any day of the week.

 

[Dr Grump]

Go lick someones nuts.

Is that watermelon the one you took out of your arse, or are you going to eat it?

 

[Dr Grump]

Historical rejection rate for mail in ballots in certain Dem districts is 3% yet this election only .1% a 30 fold swing and statistically impossible.

Okay. Now post links. Credible links. Take your time.

 

[Dr Grump]

Courts refusing to look at evidence or allow a case to continue onto the discovery phase does not mean that fraud is not there.

Er, you do realise that that is why the court is kicking these cases to touch, right? There is no evidence...that is the problem.
As I repeat ad infinitum, yelling 'fraud' doesn't mean there is fraud. And that is basically what Trump has done. He has produced no evidence. Neither has Giuliani.

You act like if Trump and his low-hanging fruit produced evidence the courts wouldn't look at it. Course they would. Now it just has to be produced. And that isn't happening. It might happen eventually, but it hasn't happened yet.

 

[RodISHI]

Courts refusing to look at evidence or allow a case to continue onto the discovery phase does not mean that fraud is not there.

Er, you do realise that that is why the court is kicking these cases to touch, right? There is no evidence...that is the problem.
As I repeat ad infinitum, yelling 'fraud' doesn't mean there is fraud. And that is basically what Trump has done. He has produced no evidence. Neither has Giuliani.

You act like if Trump and his low-hanging fruit produced evidence the courts wouldn't look at it. Course they would. Now it just has to be produced. And that isn't happening. It might happen eventually, but it hasn't happened yet.

Court cases start out with affidavits and evidence is gather with discovery. If the court refuses to allow the case without discovery and neglects to accept the affidavits of witnesses that is on the court and does not mean that fraud was not committed.

 

[ReinyDays]

Court cases start out with affidavits and evidence is gather with discovery. If the court refuses to allow the case without discovery and neglects to accept the affidavits of witnesses that is on the court and does not mean that fraud was not committed.

No ... court cases start with a complaint with evidence ... then the respondent files an answer ... sometimes the case can be dismiss at this point, like if the complaint alleges lawful actions by the respondent ... a new complaint will need to be filed with actual illegal behaviors alleged ... or the evidence doesn't meet court standards ...

As some point early in the process, there will be an evidentiary hearing ... this is where the filer states what evidence they have and plan to present at trial ... and it's decided which elements of evidence legal and which can't be used ... it is at this hearing that affidavits are submitted, discovery is ordered and depositions if needed ...

Most of these cases involving the election have been dismissed for lack of evidence ... that's NOT a loss ... the case can be refiled with better evidence ... every single one so far ...

 

[two_iron]

Not even those who have access to all the information and are suing are saying that the election was stolen.

Math and science strongly support the election was likely stolen to the point of it being scientifically implausible that it wasn't stolen.

Total. Utter. Bullshit.

Why.... because a lying piece of shit like YOU says so??

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Go fuck yourself.