A Republican gubernatorial candidate copying Trump

[BlueTex]

It is unnecessary to read anything the judge ordered since it is by an obviously corrupt judge. He didn't rule on the evidence, he summarily dismissed the suit like every other corrupt leftist judge.

No matter how you slice it, if a State has more than one method for verifying ballot signatures, then it is a fraudulent election. There are at least ten States, including Nevada, that violated their own election laws and they used COVID-19 as the vehicle for their deliberate fraud.

Losers always complain about corrupt judges and any other excuse. Trump is no different.

 

[Glitch]

Losers always complain about corrupt judges and any other excuse. Trump is no different.

In this case we have the judges decision where he illegally altered the law. That is more than sufficient grounds for impeachment.

 

[BlueTex]

In this case we have the judges decision where he illegally altered the law. That is more than sufficient grounds for impeachment.

Blah, blah, blah... Good luck on your impeachment... I'm sure it will be ignored...

 

[911Sparky]

LOL! And the GOP lemmings will give him money and lots of it.

I thought it was only trump, but apparently many in the party are using the lemmings as a personal ATM machine.

 

[911Sparky]

Washington State used mail-in ballots, and did not apply the same signature requirements to either mail-in ballots or absentee ballots as they did to in-person ballots. Which makes the Washington State election illegal by violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore fraudulent. The Republican candidate has a case.

The same illegal actions were taken in many States, and that makes all those elections in those States also fraudulent.

Did you read the article? He lost by half a million votes.

 

[Glitch]

Blah, blah, blah... Good luck on your impeachment... I'm sure it will be ignored...

That could prove to be a fatal mistake. Let's hope they don't make it.

 

[Glitch]

Did you read the article? He lost by half a million votes.

It does not matter if he won or lost. This election is beyond Trump or Biden. If there is more than one State standard for verifying the signatures of mail-in, absentee, and in-person ballots, then it is a fraudulent election. A bogus election is a far bigger concern than who won or lost. If the integrity of this election cannot be restored there will not be another.

 

[bearpoker]

Blah, blah, blah... Good luck on your impeachment... I'm sure it will be ignored...

In order for the Trumpeteers to maintain their fantasy they must indict an ever widening circle of actors in their conspiracy theory. We have the volunteers who count the votes, the people who program and maintain the voting machines, the governors and secretaries of state who run and certify the elections, the judges who reject the court challenges, and COMING SOON!!!!! the state legislatures who refuse to impeach the evil judges. I have no doubt that if this continues long enough, we'll hear about Satan's take-over of heaven as the source of all this fraud.

 

[BlueTex]

That could prove to be a fatal mistake. Let's hope they don't make it.

Fatal to who or what?

 

[dockside]

Losers always complain about corrupt judges and any other excuse. Trump is no different.

That's because they have projection down to an art.

 

[Nickyjo]

I hav

I don't need to be a resident of any State to spot the blatant election fraud being perpetrated by Democrats in at least ten (and probably more) States.

Process for validating signatures varies widely in Washington - KitSap Sun

When you have multiple different processes for signature verification, then you have massive systemic election fraud. The Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution requires every State to apply the law equally to everyone. You cannot have one signature verification standard for mail-in ballots, and a completely different signature verification standard for in-person ballots, or different signature verification standard between the various counties.

That is what the Supreme Court decided in Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000):


As you can see, this is not the first time Democrats were busted committing massive election fraud.

If it makes you feel any better, Alaska is one of those ten States guilty of massive election fraud.

I have searched on the net for any info on fraud in 2020’s election. Why can’t I find it?

Seems we are only having this conversation because Trump can’t accept losing. Face it. Barr dared to suggest there was no widespread fraud and had to go. And then there was the guy who lost his job for saying the election was clean. Trump is playing his supporters for suckers, as he did with his University and Foundation. But if someone can direct us to a source of info on fraud, I’ll read about it.

 

[Wiggen]

It is not an opinion. It is observed fact. Alaska, Arizona, California, Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, and every other State that had mail-in ballots and a different signature verification process all violated their own State laws and the US Constitution. Which makes the elections in each of those States completely fraudulent and illegal, and that is the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Please stop. You are wrong about the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore and you reveal your ignorance with every subsequent post.

 

[Glitch]

Please stop. You are wrong about the Supreme Court ruling in Bush v. Gore and you reveal your ignorance with every subsequent post.

I am not wrong about Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

Held: Because it is evident that any recount seeking to meet 3 U. S. C. § 5's December 12 "safe-harbor" date would be unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, the Florida Supreme Court's judgment ordering manual recounts is reversed. The Clause's requirements apply to the manner in which the voting franchise is exercised. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, Florida may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another. See, e. g., Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U. S. 663, 665. The recount mechanisms implemented in response to the state court's decision do not satisfy the minimum requirement for nonarbitrary treatment of voters. The record shows that the standards for accepting or rejecting contested ballots might vary not only from county to county but indeed within a single county from one recount team to another. In addition, the recounts in three counties were not limited to so-called undervotes but extended to all of the ballots. Furthermore, the actual process by which the votes were to be counted raises further concerns because the court's order did not specify who would recount the ballots. Where, as here, a court orders a statewide remedy, there must be at least some assurance that the rudimentary requirements of equal treatment and fundamental fairness are satisfied. The State has not shown that its procedures include the necessary safeguards. Upon due consideration of the difficulties identified to this point, it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work. The court below has said that the legislature intended the State's electors to participate fully in the federal electoral process, as provided in 3 U. S. C. § 5, which requires that any controversy or contest that is designed to lead to a conclusive selection of electors be completed by December 12. That date is here, but there is no recount procedure in place under the state court's order that comports with minimal constitutional standards.

Since reading comprehension is clearly an issue for you, I've emphasized the relevant portion of the decision.

All ballots in a given State must have the exact same signature verification process as is required by State law. It cannot be legally altered by the courts, for any reason. The courts do not have the authority to change or alter State law. Failure to maintain that signature verification standard is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which makes the entire election fraudulent and therefore invalid.

 

[Hamish Howl]

It is not an opinion. It is observed fact. Alaska, Arizona, California, Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Washington, Oregon, and every other State that had mail-in ballots and a different signature verification process all violated their own State laws and the US Constitution. Which makes the elections in each of those States completely fraudulent and illegal, and that is the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Except that it's not.

 

[Rogue Valley]

It is unnecessary to read anything the judge ordered since it is by an obviously corrupt judge.

Straight form the Trump playbook.

 

[Wiggen]

I am not wrong about Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

Since reading comprehension is clearly an issue for you, I've emphasized the relevant portion of the decision.

All ballots in a given State must have the exact same signature verification process as is required by State law. It cannot be legally altered by the courts, for any reason. The courts do not have the authority to change or alter State law. Failure to maintain that signature verification standard is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which makes the entire election fraudulent and therefore invalid.

Like all conservatives, you read the decision wrong. The notion that all mail balloting is invalid is so stupid as to not be worth of a response.

 

[lurchadams]

Washington State used mail-in ballots, and did not apply the same signature requirements to either mail-in ballots or absentee ballots as they did to in-person ballots. Which makes the Washington State election illegal by violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore fraudulent. The Republican candidate has a case.

The same illegal actions were taken in many States, and that makes all those elections in those States also fraudulent.

Your post is delusional and hilarious! Come arrest us, dude

 

[Wiggen]

Washington State used mail-in ballots, and did not apply the same signature requirements to either mail-in ballots or absentee ballots as they did to in-person ballots. Which makes the Washington State election illegal by violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and therefore fraudulent. The Republican candidate has a case.

The same illegal actions were taken in many States, and that makes all those elections in those States also fraudulent.

This may come as a shock to you - you being so smart and all - but Washington has NO in-person ballots. The entire state votes by mail. I'd say nice try, but it really wasn't. Do a little research before you post.