The Lawsuits

[Argus]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

I don't pretend. 

Everything you write is pretending. You pretend your worship for a piece of shit like Trump is driven by something that resembles intelligence. You pretend that his rejection by the voters must be fraud because... well... your God told you it was.

You're a cult member. And there's no using logic or reason on you.

 

 

Edited December 9, 2020 by Argus

[Argus]

44 minutes ago, Boges said:

Which is astonishing that no one here will concede that this is just a fundraising Grift. 

 

They're like 911 truthers. No amount of evidence, logic, reason or rejection is going to get through to them. No amount of rejection from the courts matters. Unless Trump himself says there was no fraud they will cling to the notion for the rest of their lives.

[Infidel Dog]

Come to think of it and seeing as you want to talk about cults.

Isn't one of the key identifiers of a cult the way they rely on the practice of 'smear, slur and slime' rather than present an argument based on sources or common sense?

See cause I heard it was, and I keep being reminded of it every time you reply.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Infidel Dog said:

Come to think of it and seeing as you want to talk about cults.

Isn't one of the key identifiers of a cult the way they rely on the practice of 'smear, slur and slime' rather than present an argument based on sources or common sense?

No. It's clinging to whatever weird assed notion their leader tells them to and ignoring all reality.

[Infidel Dog]

Really? You TDSers have a leader now, do you?

[Infidel Dog]

Is it Bejing Biden or just Bejing?

[sharkman]

38 minutes ago, Boges said:

Yes because people were voting for months before November 3rd. This was specifically a problem in these 4  Swing States. 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/america-votes/crush-of-mail-in-ballots-slows-count-in-4-key-states-1.5174004

This seems to have gone over your head.  

Counting the ballots early was against the law.  Posting the early results before or during voting would serve to affect the voting turn out, this is a basic fact that you should know.

[sharkman]

14 minutes ago, Argus said:

Everything you write is pretending. You pretend your worship for a piece of shit like Trump is driven by something that resembles intelligence. You pretend that his rejection by the voters must be fraud because... well... your God told you it was.

You're a cult member. And there's no using logic or reason on you.

 

 

Yeah, this Texas development has really triggered you, too bad about that...maybe try to not drink and post?

[Boges]

11 minutes ago, sharkman said:

This seems to have gone over your head.  

Counting the ballots early was against the law.  Posting the early results before or during voting would serve to affect the voting turn out, this is a basic fact that you should know.

They only simply said it was a Registered Democrat or a Republican. Not who they actually voted for. 

And that was only Pennsylvania, other states didn't report political affiliation. 

[366h34d]

9 minutes ago, sharkman said:

This seems to have gone over your head.  

Counting the ballots early was against the law.  Posting the early results before or during voting would serve to affect the voting turn out, this is a basic fact that you should know.

Are you sure they count the vote? I hear that it was the voter's party number. Anyway, IMO, the real problem of mail-in vote system in this election is that how could the vote return before or same day or within a day of the mail-out day? 

[sharkman]

4 minutes ago, 366h34d said:

Are you sure they count the vote? I hear that it was the voter's party number. Anyway, IMO, the real problem of mail-in vote system in this election is that how could the vote return before or same day or within a day of the mail-out day? 

Yes, at the very least there were many legal problems with how the ballots were mailed, processed and counted.  

[Shady]

Here's how Democrats stole the 2020 election.  

1.  They had state courts unconstitutionally change election law in ways not prescribed by legislatures.  Pennsylvania is the best example.  In October of 2019, the Republican legislature in Pennsylvania passed new election law allowing voting by mail.  The Democrat governor signed that bill into law.  However, he felt it didn't go far enough, and asked the legislature in the spring to pass new law, removing signature requirements, date requirements, and change the election day deadline to receive ballots.  The legislature disagreed.  The Democrat governor went to the state supreme court and got what he wanted.  The court unconstitutionally changed existing election law.

2.  Democrats went to court and successfully removed the green party from every swing state.  Because they're all about democracy! 

3.  They partnered with big tech (Facebook, Google, and Twitter) to censor negative information related to Biden.

I'll give them credit, it was a well executed plan.  It's only going to work once, especially for 1 and 2.  But the Biden cultists insisting that Democrats won fair and square and that Trump is undermining democracy are complete bullshit artists.  Democrats had their own plan for undermining democracy.  It's about time you cultists admitted it.

[Boges]

13 minutes ago, Shady said:

Here's how Democrats stole the 2020 election.  

1.  They had state courts unconstitutionally change election law in ways not prescribed by legislatures.  Pennsylvania is the best example.  In October of 2019, the Republican legislature in Pennsylvania passed new election law allowing voting by mail.  The Democrat governor signed that bill into law.  However, he felt it didn't go far enough, and asked the legislature in the spring to pass new law, removing signature requirements, date requirements, and change the election day deadline to receive ballots.  The legislature disagreed.  The Democrat governor went to the state supreme court and got what he wanted.  The court unconstitutionally changed existing election law.

2.  Democrats went to court and successfully removed the green party from every swing state.  Because they're all about democracy! 

3.  They partnered with big tech (Facebook, Google, and Twitter) to censor negative information related to Biden.

I'll give them credit, it was a well executed plan.  It's only going to work once, especially for 1 and 2.  But the Biden cultists insisting that Democrats won fair and square and that Trump is undermining democracy are complete bullshit artists.  Democrats had their own plan for undermining democracy.  It's about time you cultists admitted it.

1. The law in question only amounted to 10,000 ballots. Expanding Mail-In voting is well within the right of the states. Heck multiple states do it Universally. If this is a problem, then a third party organization should control voting like here in Canada. 

2. Guess the Dems are better arguing in court than the GOP are. 

3. No they wanted them to censor incorrect information. 

Also good luck next election when Trump is hijacking any other Republicans ambitions to lead the party and everyone is in the echo chamber of Parlour spouting their fake news. 

Edited December 9, 2020 by Boges

[Infidel Dog]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

Here's how Democrats stole the 2020 election.  

1.  They had state courts unconstitutionally change election law in ways not prescribed by legislatures.  Pennsylvania is the best example.  In October of 2019, the Republican legislature in Pennsylvania passed new election law allowing voting by mail.  The Democrat governor signed that bill into law.  However, he felt it didn't go far enough, and asked the legislature in the spring to pass new law, removing signature requirements, date requirements, and change the election day deadline to receive ballots.  The legislature disagreed.  The Democrat governor went to the state supreme court and got what he wanted.  The court unconstitutionally changed existing election law.

2.  Democrats went to court and successfully removed the green party from every swing state.  Because they're all about democracy! 

3.  They partnered with big tech (Facebook, Google, and Twitter) to censor negative information related to Biden.

I'll give them credit, it was a well executed plan.  It's only going to work once, especially for 1 and 2.  But the Biden cultists insisting that Democrats won fair and square and that Trump is undermining democracy are complete bullshit artists.  Democrats had their own plan for undermining democracy.  It's about time you cultists admitted it.

You missed one.

Billionaire leftists like Mark Zuckerberg skirted election laws by donating large amounts to front organizations like the Center for Tech and Civic Life. That money was then used to finance organization of how ballots would be counted. 

Activists like BLM were then put in control of the polls. This is how the Dems could thug march poll watchers out of the building or block view of what was going on.

 

Edited December 9, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Shady]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

1. The law in question only amounted to 10,000 ballots. Expanding Mail-In voting is well within the right of the states. Heck multiple states do it Universally. If this is a problem, then a third party organization should control voting like here in Canada. 

2. Guess the Dems are better arguing in court than the GOP are. 

3. No they wanted them to censor incorrect information. 

Also good luck next election when Trump is hijacking any other Republicans ambitions to lead the party and everyone is in the echo chamber of Parlour spouting their fake news. 

1.  How do you know?

2. It's not up to Republicans to argue in court on behalf of other parties.  But it goes to show how Democrats don't give a shit about actual democracy.

3.  What about the Hunter Biden story were incorrect?  How do you know what's correct or not if something isn't fully investigated?  Why are stories of Trump based on anonymous sources deemed correct?

[Boges]

Just now, Shady said:

1.  How do you know?

2. It's not up to Republicans to argue in court on behalf of other parties.  But it goes to show how Democrats don't give a shit about actual democracy.

3.  What about the Hunter Biden story were incorrect?  How do you know what's correct or not if something isn't fully investigated?  Why are stories of Trump based on anonymous sources deemed correct?

1. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/06/pennsylvania-republicans-supreme-court-mail-ballots-434744

Quote

Boockvar said on Thursday that all such ballots had been segregated already and that, in any event, they weren’t likely to be numerous enough to affect the outcome of the presidential contest in the state, where Vice President Joe Biden has pulled ahead.

Pennsylvania was order to set aside Mail-In votes that came after the deadline that was changed. 

2. Coming from an advocate for a party that's trying to get millions of votes to be thrown out. 

3. There was plenty of debate about the Hunter Biden story in the MSM and online. I just think most people didn't care. His name was already dragged through the month a year ago and Biden still won the nomination. Only one "MSM" publication would take the story and run with it. 

[Shady]

43 minutes ago, Boges said:

1. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/06/pennsylvania-republicans-supreme-court-mail-ballots-434744

Pennsylvania was order to set aside Mail-In votes that came after the deadline that was changed. 

2. Coming from an advocate for a party that's trying to get millions of votes to be thrown out. 

3. There was plenty of debate about the Hunter Biden story in the MSM and online. I just think most people didn't care. His name was already dragged through the month a year ago and Biden still won the nomination. Only one "MSM" publication would take the story and run with it. 

That court order segregating ballots didn’t start until November 6th.  Nice try though!

Legal votes should be counted, not illegal votes.  Each party needs to comply with the same election law.  It’s not rocket science.  Your trump hypocrisy is showing again.  I can only imagine if he had political parties removed from ballots before the election.

it’s irrelevant whether people care.  That’s not the issue.  I’m glad you finally realize that.  Now try answering the question I asked you.

[-TSS-]

Get over it! There's going to be president Kamala very soon after Senilix will be taken to some retirement home.

However, these lawsuits are absolute bollocks. Clutching at straws.

[Infidel Dog]

A record 71 million actual voters and 7 states that don't want their votes stolen hope you're wrong.

In fact, I heard their reply:

 

[Cannucklehead]

The ballots segregated weren't nearly enough to change the outcome.  More wasting of time and tax dollars that are fruitless.  Trump will claim anything (I am surprised he hasn't claimed aliens interfered yet lol) to keep this up, but in the end he has no chance of winning.  

[366h34d]

45 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

Get over it! There's going to be president Kamala very soon after Senilix will be taken to some retirement home.

However, these lawsuits are absolute bollocks. Clutching at straws.

Only in Kamala's dream. Biden will hold at least one term if he gets into WH. Kamala will sit as quite as a neutered cat in the VP office.

[Infidel Dog]

This guy below thinks the happenings over the last couple of day may have changed everything. Starting with Texas and the other 7 states suing the 4 swing states. I think he makes a good by being well supported argument:

 

[Infidel Dog]

News just keeps dropping today.

17 states filed an amicus brief backing the Texas lawsuit today:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/17-states-file-brief-backing-texas-election-lawsuit-against-ga-mi-pa-wi

Edited December 9, 2020 by Infidel Dog

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

News just keeps dropping today.

17 states filed an amicus brief backing the Texas lawsuit today:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/17-states-file-brief-backing-texas-election-lawsuit-against-ga-mi-pa-wi

The lawsuit, which is based on voter fraud allegations that lower courts have repeatedly rejected, has been widely derided by legal experts, who have deemed it “laughable,” “utter garbage” and, in the words of University of Washington law professor Lisa Marshall Manheim, “legally incoherent, factually untethered and based on theories of remedy that fundamentally misunderstand the electoral process.”

The Supreme Court dealt the Trump campaign and its allies a blow by rejecting a challenge to Pennsylvania’s election results Tuesday, however, and legal experts say it is highly unlikely the court will take up the Texas case.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2020/12/09/17-states-agree-the-supreme-court-should-overturn-election-biden-win-texas/?sh=622545d86452

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Isn't one of the key identifiers of a cult the way they rely on the practice of 'smear, slur and slime' rather than present an argument based on sources or common sense?

This is hilarious coming from the guy whose only response to all the Republican judges and state officials and party members who don’t accept Trumps fake fraud claims is to simply call them RINOS and worships professional slimmers like  Ezra Levant and Rush Limbaugh   Slurring and sliming is all you do.