32 DAYS

[Incogneeto]

Again, to the simple mind there is no evidence. In reality it is much more complicated. There are voter groups that have analyzed voter rolls and mail in/absentee request that have found tens to hundreds of thousands of illegitimate requests where ballots where sent out. Where di those ballots end up? There have been small, random ballot number audits/canvass performed that found alarming numbers illegitimate votes cast. Every time those facts were presented in a petition a judge did not let them be presented as evidence in court. The reality is this alone does not present evidence to convict someone/s of voter fraud. It only shows that the vote totals may not be legitimate. Also because of the way vote totals are reported, once they are reported there is no link to whether or not they were cast by a valid or illegitimate ballot. No judge wants to open that can of worms.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pennsylvania-county-says-election-workers-flagged-2-500-possibly-fraudulent-voter-registrations/ar-AA1sV95X?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=ef188740836847f9a71609c628c6158a&ei=72

[Incogneeto]

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/thousands-of-colorado-ballots-to-be-reexamined-for-evidence-of-fraud/ar-AA1sUFNJ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=3893223d88bb480e894fd4677a7f5f6d&ei=13

[RobertELee]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/thousands-of-colorado-ballots-to-be-reexamined-for-evidence-of-fraud/ar-AA1sUFNJ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=3893223d88bb480e894fd4677a7f5f6d&ei=13

[Jeff]

In reality, it's not that simple, but for you it probably is.

It is that simple for him, because he believes EVERYTHING he's told by the lefty media.
That much is certain.

His motto is "Believe it all, question nothing. Don't have independent thought."

[gcode]

Real evidence is important. It's NOT complicated. If you go before a court with no solid evidence and start ranting about conspiracy theories you will be rejected.

The problem is, 90% of the cases brought to court in 2020 were rejected by the courts due to "lack of standing".
Meaning they declined to take the cases... and NEVER examined the evidence.

In the case of AZ, an audit of the cast ballots found issues with about 150K ballots... far in excess of Biden's
"margin of victory"... yet the courst refused to look at the evidence "for lack of standing:.

[Bucky Cornstarch]

The problem is, 90% of the cases brought to court in 2020 were rejected by the courts due to "lack of standing".
Meaning they declined to take the cases... and NEVER examined the evidence.

In the case of AZ, an audit of the cast ballots found issues with about 150K ballots... far in excess of Biden's
"margin of victory"... yet the courst refused to look at the evidence "for lack of standing:.

Good job, G, you've got the talking points down. Word for word, from what I can tell from the other wingnut sites that I participate in.

Do yourself a favor. Look up, and try to understand, what lack of standing means, and how it has been applied with regard to the 2020 election. And before you dig too deep, make sure you didn't get sucked into Redstate or Gateway Pundit again. Those wont be much help if you are looking for actual facts as they relate to US law.

Hint: You're wrong.

Gotta admire your determination to stick with your stolen election fantasy though, even after almost four years. It will continue to shield you from reality in the off chance that Trump loses. Legitimately. Again.

(I don't think he will, BTW. But keep that election fraud thing in your back pocket, just in case.)

[gcode]

Good job, G, you've got the talking points down. Word for word, from what I can tell from the other wingnut sites that I participate in.

Do yourself a favor. Look up, and try to understand, what lack of standing means, and how it has been applied with regard to the 2020 election. And before you dig too deep, make sure you didn't get sucked into Redstate or Gateway Pundit again. Those wont be much help if you are looking for actual facts as they relate to US law.

Hint: You're wrong.

Gotta admire your determination to stick with your stolen election fantasy though, even after almost four years. It will continue to shield you from reality in the off chance that Trump loses. Legitimately. Again.

(I don't think he will, BTW. But keep that election fraud thing in your back pocket, just in case.)

Lack of standing in court means1234:
A party does not have a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged.
Without standing, the party cannot bring a lawsuit.
Standing requires demonstrating real and remediable harm.
If a plaintiff lacks standing, the court will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim.

[Jeff]

Here is who Bucky is voting for:

Someone who doesn't know which bathroom to use

Someone who wants to continue having boys invade girls' sports

Someone who wants to use taxpayer money to pay for prisoner's gender re-assignment surgery.

Someone who nobody voted for in the primaries and who was anointed by Dem elites to replace a President who's brain doesn't work anymore

Someone who won't tell us who is really running our nation

someone who flies undocumented people in the middle of the night to Ohio and has let in over 11 million (almost 20) people through our open borders bringing child trafficking and fentanyl, causing miissery and death.

Someone who wants to keep printing money to par for forever wars and is pushing Russia towards WWIII.

Someone who doesn't seem to understand or want to understand our Constitution and that our Right to free speech is our guaranteed 1st Amendment right what Kumbucket and Tampon Tim call a "privilege".


~Rob Schneider to Michael Keaton.

[RobertELee]

This is what the federal government has been doing with illegals if you want some proof. Your tax money being given to everyone but our own.

Zoom to 4:30 if you want, as my main point is from 4:30 to about 9:00, but the entire clip is pretty infuriating.

[RobertELee]

LOL! And I just read an alert that says Washington Post won't endorse any candidate this year. Even though they have endorsed a Democrat 10 of the last 11 elections.   

[Jeff]

LOL! And I just read an alert that says Washington Post won't endorse any candidate this year. Even though they have endorsed a Democrat 10 of the last 11 elections.   

Because their TDS won't let them endorse a Republican.

[YoDoug]

[neurosis]

What they did

If Trump wins, will you admit that you were wrong?

[YoDoug]

If Trump wins, will you admit that you were wrong?

Depends. If it looks like an honest count then yes. If it looks like they tried all the same BS they did in 2020 but just underestimated how much they would need to cheat, I will call it as it looks.

[neurosis]

Depends. If it looks like an honest count then yes. If it looks like they tried all the same BS they did in 2020 but just underestimated how much they would need to cheat, I will call it as it looks.

According to Newb, all of our elected officials are pre-planned.  Maybe they plan on Trump again?