U.S. attorney in Georgia: ‘There’s just nothing to’ claims of election fraud

[Lursa]

#304

Unfortunately for you, it's just one more display that:

No, you are still wrong. I know you cant understand why at this point but if you cannot properly articulate even your questions for better understanding, this entire thread is obviously over your head.

Post 281 for reference...again, I'm happy to explain more if you can articulate a question.

 

[Highlanders]

Yes, he did state that...and he ****ing lied, He has no engineering degree.

He took some classes in Machine Learning, but that is about it.



cross examinations are the remedy, they can point out to all the morons out there they have been lied to.

Of course, using your yard stick, the wright brother took no classes and shouldn't of been allowed to fly!

 

[MaryP]

some people are so stupid and easily brainwashed that they still believe it was stolen.

I'm beginning to wonder if they still believe, or if like Trump and the Republicans they're just lying.

 

[Highlanders]

If the ****ing morons want to start a civil war over a lie, then so be it. I will have no problem taking them out. I will be happy to go back on active duty for the chance.

Yip, that's what I expected, hope you feel the same when the shit starts...... let me tell you, it's not going to be like Hollywood!

 

[W_Heisenberg]

In several cases judges altered the law In other cases state auditors or non-legislative committees altered the law/rules Only a state legislature has that authority. They can not grant that authority to the judiciary or political appointees.

This just isn't true. You don't know what you're talking about. It depends on how the law was originally written, and which rules were implemented on the basis of those laws, and which rules were changed, and in what way those rules were changed. And, the courts also have the power to review laws and amend them if necessary, and this includes laws related to how electors are chosen. The laws related to how electors are chosen are no different than any other set of laws passed by any particular state legislature.

 

[GolfingChef]

Of course, using your yard stick, the wright brother took no classes and shouldn't of been allowed to fly!

Oh Jesus ****ing Christ ...really. This is where we are now. Why do you think they lied about him and why do you think he lied? Because he knew that if he said he was an engineer it would sound better than if he said he was a failed inventor.

your side did this same thing in Az, they said their expert there was a mathematician and data analyst, yet he had no training or experience or education in either.

They lie about these things because they have no case and they know their worshipers like you will never question a thing you are told.

 

[GolfingChef]

Yip, that's what I expected, hope you feel the same when the shit starts...... let me tell you, it's not going to be like Hollywood!

20 years in the Marine Corps including being in Iraq for the very first gulf war. I do not need some kid behind the computer in his mommy's basement telling me what life is like

 

[Tahuyaman]

Apparently you didnt understand the SCOTUS decision also in that post. State legislatures are responsible for that but according to their decision, other bodies changing the laws can be upheld. They wrote that the will of the voters was higher priority than process.

Reread it and let me know if you still dont get it.

The Supreme Court has never ruled that appointed officials, non legislative officials or judges are constitutionally authorized to change or alter state election laws or rules.

 

[GolfingChef]

The Supreme Court has never ruled that appointed officials, non legislative officials or judges are constitutionally authorized to change or alter state election laws or rules.

But they did choose not to hear cases to stop it from happening...which is a ruling in and of itself.

 

[Lursa]

The Supreme Court has never ruled that appointed officials, non legislative officials or judges are constitutionally authorized to change or alter state election laws or rules.

The decision in that post says differently, that they are not prohibited from doing so. Again...what part dont you understand?

 

[Parrish]

No, because I call a spade a spade. Someone posting "Trump legal challenges" implies that he filed them all. I don't let anyone get away with bullshit. You know this by now. To be fair though, some of you don't know your own BS because all you do is post headlines of the assassins in MSM.

2020 Election Litigation Tracker - SCOTUSblog

Donald J. Trump for President v. Way	Whether an executive order by the governor of New Jersey in light of the coronavirus pandemic that requires mail-in ballots to be sent to all registered voters in the state, and extends the deadline for submitting them, violates federal election law and the Constitution.	U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
Donald J. Trump for President v. Cegavske	Whether recent changes by the state legislature to Nevada's voting procedures including, among other things, the expansion of voting-by-mail and a requirement that officials count ballots received up to three days after Election Day, violate federal election law and the Fourteenth Amendment.	U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Boockvar

Whether a number of Pennsylvania elections accommodations in light of the coronavirus pandemic – providing additional drop-off sites and alleviating signature-matching requirements for absentee ballots, as well as lifting a restriction on employing out-of-county poll workers – violate state election law and the U.S. Constitution.

Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Boockvar

Whether a number of Pennsylvania elections accommodations in light of the coronavirus pandemic – providing additional drop-off sites and alleviating signature-matching requirements for absentee ballots, as well as lifting a restriction on employing out-of-county poll workers – violate state election law and the U.S. Constitution.

 

[Tahuyaman]

The decision in that post says differently, that they are not prohibited from doing so. Again...what part dont you understand?

Here’s a fact. The US constitution allows only state legislatures o create or alter election laws or times. Period. This is a fact.

 

[Plasmaball]

THE MAN WHO WILL SAVE AMERICA... "This Isn't the Beating of a Drum, This Is the Burning of a City!" - Inventor Jovan Pulitzer DESTROYS Georgia's Corrupted 2020 Election Results | The Gateway Pundit | by Joe Hoft | 88

Inventor Jovan Hutton Pulitzer was in front of the Georgia Senate today and he totally destroyed Georgia’s 2020 election results and offered a plan where for free, he will determine the accurate results by examining the paper ballots used in the election.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

They can't. By law they have to be stored for at least 2 months.

Gateway..lol what trash

 

[Lursa]

Here’s a fact. The US constitution allows only state legislatures o create or alter election laws or times. Period. This is a fact.

SCOTUS interprets what the US Constitution allows and doesnt. Their decision included in post 281 is a clear demonstration of that. This is a fact...your comment is wishful thinking.

Again...I dont see you able to actually discuss their decision.

 

[Highlanders]

They can't. By law they have to be stored for at least 2 months.

Gateway..lol what trash

You miss the point entirely, perhaps you're too emotionally involved to think clearly. If it's that simple to analyise the votes a simple random sample could be taken and if any dubiety, proving claims, even one, then a full count and a judicial review, without terms of reference, swift decisions and swift action, with jail for anyone found to of corrupted or attempted to corrupt the will of the people.
Hey presto.... everyone's happy, apart from the criminals!

 

[Tahuyaman]

SCOTUS interprets what the US Constitution allows and doesnt. Their decision included in post 281 is a clear demonstration of that. This is a fact...your comment is wishful thinking.

Again...I dont see you able to actually discuss their decision.

So then you think Citizens United is good law?


The US constitution is crystal clear. The authority to create or alter state election laws and rules falls solely on the legislature .

 

[Lursa]

So then you think Citizens United is good law?

off-topic

The US constitution is crystal clear. The authority to create or alter state election laws and rules falls solely on the legislature .

SCOTUS interprets what the US Constitution allows and doesnt. Their decision included in post 281 is a clear demonstration of that. This is a fact...your comment is wishful thinking.

Again...I dont see you able to actually discuss their decision.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

So then you think Citizens United is good law?

The US constitution is crystal clear. The authority to create or alter state election laws and rules falls solely on the legislature .

Election laws in general, and how a legislature chooses to appoint electors (Article II, Section 1, Clause 3), are subject to the same conditions that all other laws are subject to. There is nothing about the Constitution that makes election laws or laws related to how states appoint electors (Article II, Section 1, Clause 3) any different or special than other kinds of laws.

 

[Tahuyaman]

off-topic


SCOTUS interprets what the US Constitution allows and doesnt. Their decision included in post 281 is a clear demonstration of that. This is a fact...your comment is wishful thinking.

Again...I dont see you able to actually discuss their decision.

Not off topic Evidently you think the SCOTUS is always right, correct? Or are they only right if you agree with them?

If the Supreme Court ruled that election laws and rules can be changed by judges or non legislative members, they are wrong . However that's not what they actually said.

 

[jpn]

When you have nothing to stand on, you attack the source. That's a sign of intellectual laziness.

Yeah, reading "Gateway Pundit" is for the highly intellectual.

 

[Lursa]

Not off topic Evidently you think the SCOTUS is always right, correct? Or are they only right if you agree with them?

Happy to address this once you properly address what I have been asking you.

If the Supreme Court ruled that election laws and rules can be changed by judges or non legislative members, they are wrong .

Ah! So now it's just that since they ruled against what you want, they're wrong.

That's not surprising, it seems a common, erroneous 'belief'. Between 60-90 judges ruled against the 2020 election challenges and a good number, including 3 on SCOTUS, were appointed by The Donald. I guess "ALL" of them were wrong?

[However that's not what they actually said.

Great, please explain how. You have the decision to work from.

 

[Tahuyaman]

Yeah, reading "Gateway Pundit" is for the highly intellectual.

Are an echo chamber type?

 

[Highlanders]

20 years in the Marine Corps including being in Iraq for the very first gulf war. I do not need some kid behind the computer in his mommy's basement telling me what life is like

Oooh..... you silly sausage!
First gulf war, where you had no standing army, and were American military slaughtered civilians, fleeing men women and children Kuwaits, Iraqis, Lebanese Libyans, British, French, German, in fact anyone who was on holiday, business or visiting family, on the road of death to Basra? Or perhaps where the RAF jets flew between American aircraft, and fleeing civilians trucks, cars, lorries even people on foot, in that heat, to stop the slaughter? I wasn't there, but I had many friends still serving.
Or perhaps it was the second gulf war, where the butchery was even greater, and what was left of Saddams army, was defenceless, according to Scott Ritter, were butchered. And as for the illegal war, it was was sold to American and England by bLair and Bush as a used car salesman would sell a clapped out banger, according to Hans Blix. On lies and deceit! Ooh, I won't mention the white phosphorous, the dime bombs or depleted uranium used against the civilian population.
Should I speak about the Kuwait children, babies thrown out of incubators, and bayoneted by Saddams troops, a blatant lie, by the Kuwaiti Ambassador to Americas, daughter, all crying and pathetic! Or what about the baby milk factory that was supposed to be producing Ricin! More lies and more deceit to justify the genocide!
If I were you, I'd keep very quiet!
Want to talk about the Abu Chraib prison, where the Americans torture abused, used electric shocks, against naked prisoners, there murder, rape, sodomy of men women and even children? And that was just the tip, the very tip, of a very big iceberg!
Aye...... very quiet! Indeed!

 

[jpn]

Never mind changing the subject, the courts decided, they didn't have jurisdiction, so heard nothing of argument!
That is the problem in a nut shell!

Some of the complaints were not decided on the merits because they lacked jurisdiction.
Some of the complaints met jurisdiction and were decided on the merits, and found lacking.
Out of 62 cases, only one was decided in favor of the Republicans, and that was a very minor adjustment of changing the number of days to correct an absentee ballot from 9 days to 6.

All the rest? FAIL.

 

[jpn]

The 74 million Americans complaining is all that's required, no cross examinations required, remedy the situation, or civil war?

Remedy: Stop listening to far-right conspiracy outlets. Join the rest of us living in the real world.