Trump very likely to win 2020 election thru court challenge - Rutgers law professor

[RLLD 4,283]

1 hour ago, Utilit99 said:

Never gets old watching mdc in action...

Oddly,

I do not see any such behaviors from the right.....no marching, or screaming "not my president", no violence, or looting or burning.....

How about that?

[Voltaire 5,534]

38 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Oddly,

I do not see any such behaviors from the right.....no marching, or screaming "not my president", no violence, or looting or burning.....

How about that?

Aren't there some entirely peaceful protests? 

[nobody 2,952]

10 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

My BF didn’t vote for Trump, went R down ballot. I get it. 

You are very tolerant. I hope you kids make it.

[RLLD 4,283]

47 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Aren't there some entirely peaceful protests? 

I wonder, are there?  Perhaps you can point to a locality where something did not burn.

 

Then for fun, lets try to find someone who supports conservative/Republicans doing any of the repugnant things the left/democrats have done...

[shorepatrol 1,871]

3 hours ago, Fireballer said:

Yeah...I gotta draw the line somewhere.  If the votes are there to overturn, it is what it is.  But this level of cringe...I just cant.

Ya, that b!tch is insane 

[Boots11234 108]

Let’s be honest, boarding up everything before the election was for the Biden voting animals in case he lost. 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

77M plus voted for this guy but rallies looked like a garage sale. Not phucking believable. I concede nothing.  

[Fireballer 2,694]

3 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

77M plus voted for this guy but rallies looked like a garage sale. Not phucking believable. I concede nothing.  

The fixers had no idea that Trumps landslide was gonna be this big.  That's why all these anomalies are so sloppy. 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,093]

Where were the servers that tabulated the votes? Pretty simple question. Hard to believe our free and fair press hasn’t brought that to our attention. What’s the use of having a free press if they are owned? They aren’t free then. 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

3 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

The fixers had no idea that Trumps landslide was gonna be this big.  That's why all these anomalies are so sloppy. 

The most hated man on 95% of all media and the response is a couple dozen cars honking at events for the man who is taking him out.

Only question I have is who gets to wear the planetary grand crown of fraud. It's obviously not Biden.   

[Mike Honcho 5,558]

So far they are batting .000 in  their lawsuits.  I'd probably avoid that professor's classes.

Quote

 

WaPo

Republicans have made claims of election irregularities in six states where President-elect Joe Biden leads in the vote count, alleging in lawsuits and public statements that election officials did not follow proper procedures while counting ballots in Tuesday’s election.

So far, they have gone 0 for 6.

 

 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,093]

5 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

So far they are batting .000 in  their lawsuits.  I'd probably avoid that professor's classes.

 

And has it been appealed to the Supreme Court? Might want to wait on spiking the ball just yet. 

[Voltaire 5,534]

35 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

So far they are batting .000 in  their lawsuits.  I'd probably avoid that professor's classes.

 

Does anybody know about these court cases? The evidence we're talking about is massive and overwhelming but what the WaPo is talking about is small potatoes stuff. So I'm wondering if one is true or the other or if can both be true. Is this WaPo lies/spin or is the evidence in court severely watered down from what we're talking about inline and if so, why? Is the stuff we're looking at online heresay and unpresentable as evidence as the left claims? I mean, examining the evidence, the stuff in Michigan would seemingly be is a slam dunk easy win for Trump, or should be if the facts are presented they say it is. As I'm most familiar with Michigan, I would very much like to see what was presented, what was not and why what was not presented was withheld. If we're withholding out best evidence, that would call it's veracity into question and undermine the whole thing. Specifically what I'm talking about is that, I want to learn the truth about that 4AM ballot bomb and the election officials' explanation for why those windows were covered up and poll watchers kicked out.

WaPo yawned but they are partisan and unreliable and goes down the list doing the same with other states. There's really no news outlets I trust on this other than right wing ones and I am always working so hard to be impartial and not apply my own confirmation bias. So, I'm operating on manual and more than a bit overwhelmed.  

Again, TL/DR, the crux is what evidence was presented, what was withheld and why was it withheld?

[Mike Honcho 5,558]

3 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Does anybody know about these court cases? The evidence we're talking about is massive and overwhelming but what the WaPo is talking about is small potatoes stuff. So I'm wondering if one is true or the other or if can both be true. Is this WaPo lies/spin or is the evidence in court severely watered down from what we're talking about inline and if so, why? Is the stuff we're looking at online heresay and unpresentable as evidence as the left claims? I mean, examining the evidence, the stuff in Michigan would seemingly be is a slam dunk easy win for Trump, or should be if the facts are presented they say it is. As I'm most familiar with Michigan, I would very much like to see what was presented, what was not and why what was not presented was withheld. If we're withholding out best evidence, that would call it's veracity into question and undermine the whole thing. Specifically what I'm talking about is that, I want to learn the truth about that 4AM ballot bomb and the election officials' explanation for why those windows were covered up and poll watchers kicked out.

WaPo yawned but they are partisan and unreliable and goes down the list doing the same with other states. There's really no news outlets I trust on this other than right wing ones and I am always working so hard to be impartial and not apply my own confirmation bias. So, I'm operating on manual and more than a bit overwhelmed.  

Again, TL/DR, the crux is what evidence was presented, what was withheld and why was it withheld?

There has been no evidence presented, mostly there have been GOP lawyers laughed out of court. Cardboard was wrong(poll workers felt say the felt threatened by the mass of people gathering outside--who were not official observers),  but official poll watchers  weren't kicked out.

6 states, 0-10 in cases. Right wing websites and twitter aren't the best ways of determining if evidence is overwhelming.

 

[Cdub100 3,996]

Are we winning yet?

[Voltaire 5,534]

1 minute ago, Mike Honcho said:

There has been no evidence presented, mostly there have been GOP lawyers laughed out of court. Cardboard was wrong(poll workers felt say the felt threatened by the mass of people gathering outside--who were not official observers),  but official poll watchers  weren't kicked out.

6 states, 0-10 in cases. Right wing websites and twitter aren't the best ways of determining if evidence is overwhelming.

 

I hate to tell you this Mike, but I don't trust the MSM in the slightest to give us an accurate assessment on the situation. 

[MDC 8,146]

11 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Does anybody know about these court cases? 

PA accepted mailed ballots up to 3 days after the election. I know the GOP is fighting that but 1) SCOTUS already ruled that it was okay and 2) only 10k ballots were received in a state Joe won by 50k.

They’re also claiming GOP poll watchers were kept several feet further away from ballot counters than the six feet required by law. That one hit laughed out of court.

Mostly it seems like a “throw everything at the wall and hope something sticks” approach. 

[Mike Honcho 5,558]

3 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

I hate to tell you this Mike, but I don't trust the MSM in the slightest to give us an accurate assessment on the situation. 

Great, I'm not the MSM and looked at the actual court cases, and the GOP is 0-10, because they have shown NO EVIDENCE in any of the cases...nothing, nada, zilch. And if you want to cling to the non-MSM(who are 10x more biased) telling you there is fraud, then you are losing you fight against your confirmation bias.

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

Normally official evidence is found after an audit. Not the other way around. Otherwise there would be no need for an audit. The IRS catches massive fraud all the time just doing random audits. 

[Voltaire 5,534]

1 minute ago, Mike Honcho said:

Great, I'm not the MSM and looked at the actual court cases, and the GOP is 0-10, because they have shown NO EVIDENCE in any of the cases...nothing, nada, zilch. And if you want to cling to the non-MSM(who are 10x more biased) telling you there is fraud, then you are losing you fight against your confirmation bias.

What would be nice is to see what was argued and what was withheld and a decision of why what was withheld was withheld before we toss it out. If they're fighting without their best evidence, they aren't going to win over people like you, assuming that you were open to look at it, and, I already said, it would challenge the veracity of that evidence. The MSM may be lying about what happened in court as they are wholly unreliable and their partisan agenda is on full display, they like covering up the truth. That said, they also may be accurate as well. If what I claim is overwhelming evidence isn't presented, then I have to look at it again in that light and wonder why not.

[Voltaire 5,534]

Tim Pool is doing a good job here trying to sort through the situation and the rival claims.

[Fireballer 2,694]

56 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

Normally official evidence is found after an audit. Not the other way around. Otherwise there would be no need for an audit. The IRS catches massive fraud all the time just doing random audits. 

Yeah, I love the "no evidence" clown show.  Maybe there is, maybe there isn't.  But refute claims when no layers of the onion have been peeled back?  Asinine.   

[tubby_mcgee 702]

On 11/6/2020 at 6:31 PM, Frozenbeernuts said:

If you really want a civil war, then give Trump the presidency through the courts even if Biden wins originally

It will rid of us of much of the problem-causers in society. 

Everyone knows d@mn well these pukes running around wrecking the country are liberals.

A civil war, would get rid of them. And likely get rid of the CNN offices, etc. 

If the libs want to fight, they'd better get their pink d!ldos and hairspray ready.  Oh, and their gas bombs lol.  Tough to throw a gas bomb when both your arms are gone and liquids are leaking out out at a rate a quart every 10 seconds.    Civil War is what the blue is pushing for, yet if you tell them "okay, lets have a civil war" or that its  great idea, they start in with the name calling and threat making.  

 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

GA is also re-canvasing.   

 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,093]

Looks like Arizona and Nevada are going to Biden 

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

REPORT: According to AZ GOP Chairwoman, all Republicans retained their seats in one of the Arizona districts. However, in that same district, Joe Biden received 75% of the votes—statistically impossible.

[Gladiators 2,035]

1 minute ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

REPORT: According to AZ GOP Chairwoman, all Republicans retained their seats in one of the Arizona districts. However, in that same district, Joe Biden received 75% of the votes—statistically impossible.

If true...

[Fireballer 2,694]

2 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

REPORT: According to AZ GOP Chairwoman, all Republicans retained their seats in one of the Arizona districts. However, in that same district, Joe Biden received 75% of the votes—statistically impossible.

Is it truly impossible?  Did alot of people have a Supermike80 mentality and either no vote for POTUS/or vote Joe and then straight red?  It be interesting to see how many total votes those Reps got v/s Joe and Trump. I'm not trying to argue, I hope its true, just asking if it's truly impossible.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,093]

Just now, Fireballer said:

Is it truly impossible?  Did alot of people have a Supermike80 mentality and either no vote for POTUS/or vote Joe and then straight red?  It be interesting to see how many total votes those Reps got v/s Joe and Trump. I'm not trying to argue, I hope its true, just asking if it's truly impossible.

Improbable. Of course not impossible. Only one way to find out. 

[Frozenbeernuts 2,457]

28 minutes ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

REPORT: According to AZ GOP Chairwoman, all Republicans retained their seats in one of the Arizona districts. However, in that same district, Joe Biden received 75% of the votes—statistically impossible.

Its not impossible at all. People underestimate the hate for Trump.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,093]

Just now, Frozenbeernuts said:

Its not impossible at all. People underestimate the hate for Trump.

Not 75 pct. nope.  

[Reality 3,141]

5 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

Its not impossible at all. People underestimate the hate for Trump.

I believe they'd leave it blank before 75% went to Biden. It's incredibly improbable.

[Gepetto 1,486]

29 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Is it truly impossible?  Did alot of people have a Supermike80 mentality and either no vote for POTUS/or vote Joe and then straight red?  It be interesting to see how many total votes those Reps got v/s Joe and Trump. I'm not trying to argue, I hope its true, just asking if it's truly impossible.

It would be interesting to see the H Clinton vs Trump votes in 2016 for the same district along with the Congressional votes then too.

[Fireballer 2,694]

2 hours ago, FlyinHeadlock said:

REPORT: According to AZ GOP Chairwoman, all Republicans retained their seats in one of the Arizona districts. However, in that same district, Joe Biden received 75% of the votes—statistically impossible.

After reading more of Dr Shivas analysis, this actually makes sense.  Heavy red areas were actually the areas targeted for vote switching.  Heavy Dem areas, like Wayne MI, showed no deviation from what was expected.  

So was 

[Mike Honcho 5,558]

4 hours ago, Voltaire said:

What would be nice is to see what was argued and what was withheld and a decision of why what was withheld was withheld before we toss it out. If they're fighting without their best evidence, they aren't going to win over people like you, assuming that you were open to look at it, and, I already said, it would challenge the veracity of that evidence. The MSM may be lying about what happened in court as they are wholly unreliable and their partisan agenda is on full display, they like covering up the truth. That said, they also may be accurate as well. If what I claim is overwhelming evidence isn't presented, then I have to look at it again in that light and wonder why not.

The MSM is lying about what happened in court..cmon man, you win or lose.  What is there to lie about  If the judges upheld the challenges to the election, you think it would be a secret, it would be the biggest news going.

The fact is...these Trump Lawyers are NYJets of election law.

[lod001 1,345]

1 hour ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

Its not impossible at all. People underestimate the hate for Trump.

While true, wouldn't the overall election be statistically near the same %? or is the AZ hate just way above average.

[OldMaid 2,137]

1 hour ago, lod001 said:

While true, wouldn't the overall election be statistically near the same %? or is the AZ hate just way above average.

He sh!t all over John Mc Cain and his wife Cindy did a great job of organizing against Trump. 

[Fireballer 2,694]

2 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

He sh!t all over John Mc Cain and his wife Cindy did a great job of organizing against Trump. 

That was stupid.  He had need to double down on the nuclear level McCain hate.

[OldMaid 2,137]

2 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

That was stupid.  He had need to double down on the nuclear level McCain hate.

Well, people are wondering why he lost AZ. 

[lod001 1,345]

7 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

He sh!t all over John Mc Cain and his wife Cindy did a great job of organizing against Trump. 

Oh yeah, that's right. Major screwup there.