Trumpers try to act like every court DIDN'T rule against them...

[The Banker]

Yet Trump appointed many of the ones who rejected rudy's crap

A few

most of of the suits were rejected on procedural grounds rather than factual

1)In a ruling late Saturday, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann — a Republican and Federalist Society member in central Pennsylvania — compared the campaign’s legal arguments to “Frankenstein’s Monster,” concluding that Trump’s team offered only “speculative accusations,” not proof of rampant corruption.

2) Judge Robert Baldi wrote that most of the contested ballots contained “minor irregularities,” and that tossing them out is “not necessary to prevent fraud, and there would be no other significant interest undermined by allowing these ballots to be counted.”
In fact, in his order, Baldi took pains to point out that the parties in the case “specifically stipulated” that “there exists no evidence of any fraud, misconduct, or any impropriety with respect to the challenged ballots.”

3) “Charges of unfairness are serious,” Bibas wrote in the nonprecedential opinion. “But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”

There was no fraud. There was no evidence of fraud. All claims of fraud have been rejected by multiple courts. Its over Trump lost.

 

[Lesh]

First they act like Courts didn't rule against them

Then they claim that. the courts are all biased. Even the ones run by Republicans and even the ones run by Trump appointed judges.

It's truly bizarre. The only conclusion one can have is that they don't believe any of this, that it's just a tantrum

 

[Mac-7]

1)In a ruling late Saturday, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann — a Republican and Federalist Society member in central Pennsylvania — compared the campaign’s legal arguments to “Frankenstein’s Monster,” concluding that Trump’s team offered only “speculative accusations,” not proof of rampant corruption.

I’m sorry that the trump legal team was so incompetent

but thats not my fault

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Was the evidence "debunked" or simply thrown out without even being looked at?

It was looked at.
Rudy Giuliani presented it before multiple courts. THEY ALL REJECTED THE LIES

Were they “lies” or not enough evidence? Not the same thing.

 

[The Banker]

Was the evidence "debunked" or simply thrown out without even being looked at?

It was looked at.
Rudy Giuliani presented it before multiple courts. THEY ALL REJECTED THE LIES

Were they “lies” or not enough evidence? Not the same thing.

complete and total lies. Fabrications. There was no fraud. The courts have spoken. It is over. Biden won...

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Was the evidence "debunked" or simply thrown out without even being looked at?

It was looked at.
Rudy Giuliani presented it before multiple courts. THEY ALL REJECTED THE LIES

Were they “lies” or not enough evidence? Not the same thing.

complete and total lies. Fabrications. There was no fraud. The courts have spoken. It is over. Biden won...

Link please. I would like to see the word “lies”. No one is disputing that Biden won. You just moved the goal posts, coward.

 

[Lesh]

No one is disputing that Biden won

WTF are you talking about?

We've had two MONTHS of that garbage. Your buddies attacked the Capitol.

70% of Republicans still believe Trump won and Biden stole the election. Glad you're not one of em.

 

[Mac-7]

First they act like Courts didn't rule against them

Then they claim that. the courts are all biased. Even the ones run by Republicans and even the ones run by Trump appointed judges.

It's truly bizarre.

Bizarre is card carrying liberals like you who have spent a lifetime claiming that the courts are unfair to black people and the poor in general suddenly claiming that the judges are infallible

since Roe V Wade I have understood that the legal system is not blind justice as we like to think it is

the courts rendered a political decision that was not favorable to trump voters like myself

 

[my2¢]

I look at it as time to move on. They have every right to believe in election fraud as I have to believe Trump was mentally unfit for office. At this time there's no reason to think folks on either side will change their minds.

 

[Lesh]

Bizarre is card carrying liberals like you who have spent a lifetime claiming that the courts are unfair to black people and the poor in general suddenly claiming that the judges are infallible

SIXTY...6-0 Court decisions that ruled against Trump. No one is claiming infallibility. But SIXTY courts dude?

Come on

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Trumpers try to act like every court DIDN'T rule against them...

Every court refused to hear any evidence and summarily dismissed them without consideration for their merits.

Every court refused to hear any evidence and summarily dismissed them without consideration for their merits.

Derp....
By definition, a ruling is made through considering the merits.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Was the evidence "debunked" or simply thrown out without even being looked at?

Exactly. Not one bit of evidence and not one witness ever made it to court. NOT ONE.

Exactly. Not one bit of evidence and not one witness ever made it to court. NOT ONE.

IKR...
If only the judges would release some sort of explanation of their decision it may be clearer.

 

[Mac-7]

Bizarre is card carrying liberals like you who have spent a lifetime claiming that the courts are unfair to black people and the poor in general suddenly claiming that the judges are infallible

SIXTY...6-0 Court decisions that ruled against Trump. No one is claiming infallibility. But SIXTY courts dude?

Come on

In many cases the court did not rule on facts but merely procedural qestions such as who has standing to sue

and yes, politics played a big part in many of the decisions

 

[The Banker]

Bizarre is card carrying liberals like you who have spent a lifetime claiming that the courts are unfair to black people and the poor in general suddenly claiming that the judges are infallible

SIXTY...6-0 Court decisions that ruled against Trump. No one is claiming infallibility. But SIXTY courts dude?

Come on

In many cases the court did not rule on facts but merely procedural qestions such as who has standing to sue

and yes, politics played a big part in many of the decisions

Not true at all
TOTAL LIE

1)In a ruling late Saturday, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann — a Republican and Federalist Society member in central Pennsylvania — compared the campaign’s legal arguments to “Frankenstein’s Monster,” concluding that Trump’s team offered only “speculative accusations,” not proof of rampant corruption.

2) Judge Robert Baldi wrote that most of the contested ballots contained “minor irregularities,” and that tossing them out is “not necessary to prevent fraud, and there would be no other significant interest undermined by allowing these ballots to be counted.”
In fact, in his order, Baldi took pains to point out that the parties in the case “specifically stipulated” that “there exists no evidence of any fraud, misconduct, or any impropriety with respect to the challenged ballots.”

3) “Charges of unfairness are serious,” Bibas wrote in the nonprecedential opinion. “But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”

 

[Lesh]

Bizarre is card carrying liberals like you who have spent a lifetime claiming that the courts are unfair to black people and the poor in general suddenly claiming that the judges are infallible

SIXTY...6-0 Court decisions that ruled against Trump. No one is claiming infallibility. But SIXTY courts dude?

Come on

In many cases the court did not rule on facts but merely procedural qestions such as who has standing to sue

and yes, politics played a big part in many of the decisions

Thank you counselor. By the way...where did you get your law degree? We have "qestions"

 

[colfax_m]

I’m sorry that the trump legal team was so incompetent

but thats not my fault

Competent lawyers didn’t participate because competent lawyers don’t really like working for Trump and because there really was no case to bring.

The fact that his legal team was garbage reflects the weakness of the argument.

 

[Lesh]

Competent lawyers didn’t participate because competent lawyers don’t really like working for Trump and because there really was no case to bring.

The fact that his legal team was garbage reflects the weakness of the argument.

Competent lawyers want a case that they can win and that they will get paid for bringing.

Neither was the case here so you get the likes of the Krazy Kraken Lady, Lin QAnon Wood, and Rudy Toot Toot

 

[Hutch Starskey]

1)In a ruling late Saturday, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann — a Republican and Federalist Society member in central Pennsylvania — compared the campaign’s legal arguments to “Frankenstein’s Monster,” concluding that Trump’s team offered only “speculative accusations,” not proof of rampant corruption.

I’m sorry that the trump legal team was so incompetent

but thats not my fault

I’m sorry that the trump legal team was so incompetent

but thats not my fault

That is not your fault. Going along with the lie is.

 

[Mac-7]

Competent lawyers didn’t participate because competent lawyers don’t really like working for Trump and because there really was no case to bring.

The lawyers in question made a business decision

They chose to stay on the good side of the Deep State and all the associated swamp rats in washington rather than work for trump and possibly never work again

 

[Mac-7]

That is not your fault. Going along with the lie is.

I dont think its a lie