Election Law

I am posting this because I honestly don’t know how relevant it is.

I am asking ATS to comment please.

gab.com...

Two things,

1. This is not the mud pit
2. If someone can figure out how to post this I would appreciate it TIA

originally posted by: Aallanon
I am posting this because I honestly don’t know how relevant it is.

I am asking ATS to comment please.

gab.com...

Two things,

1. This is not the mud pit
2. If someone can figure out how to post this I would appreciate it TIA

It is exactly what Rudy said in an interview today on NewsMax.

Essentially Pennsylvania screwed the pooch by defying a Supreme Court order.

So THAT will be a pretty easy legal battle and Pennsylvania will be Trump's by about 800,000.

Now on to Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Nevada...

a reply to: Lumenari

a reply to: Aallanon

and thus the 600 lawyers on Joe Biden's team, they knew the election was likely going to be contested for legitimate reasons. Once one state falls watch the other fall one by one.

a reply to: Aallanon

Alito oversees the third circuit court. What i find interesting is the Ohio AG (6th circuit under sotomayer) asked supreme court to overturn the ruling that allowed extended deadlines. This makes PA's problem more than just unequal protection to all voters in PA to have the same opportunity to vote after the cutoff -- its unfair to the rest of the country.

And this this here link to pdf citing Cutlers letter to Tom Wolf which says that they need to perform a full audit so the people do not lose faith in the election process, but implies very loosely by this statement that the votes may not be certified short of an audit.

In short, the Legislature of each state is the sole authority determining the outcome of the presidential election in that state. Let that sink in. The governor, secretary of state, and state Supreme Court have no say. So what happened in Pennsylvania? Pennsylvania law states clearly that the election ends at 8 P.M. on Election Day.

The evidence of fraud looks generally like this (partial list): Extended voting beyond legal limits (PA) Failure to segregate late versus timely ballots (PA) Failure to check identifying marks on ballots (PA, GA, MI, NV) Refusal to allow Republican election observers (most) Blocking windows to prevent observation (Detroit) 4 A.M. dumps of 100% Biden votes (WI 65K, MI 138,499) Large number of Biden ballots with only president vote compared to Trump ballots Voting wards with more votes than voters (WI)

When only Republican observers are kept away, this is prima facie evidence of criminal intent by Democrats. It is parallel to obstruction of justice, but again, election law is different. A court is allowed to use this sort of action against the offending party.

www.americanthinker.com...

a reply to: Aallanon

Not sure why whoever this is is calling exspoliation a legal concept.


Exspoliation definitions
(obsolete) Spoliation.

If I'm reading this right this person is claiming that legal ballots will be thrown out because they were mixed in with illegal ballots.

Doesn't sound right to me. But I don't know.

But if true then any trump mail in ballots mixed in with these alleged illegal ballots would also be thrown out.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Yah, I agree i didnt see this when i just checked online in Blacks Law dictionary. I could pull my older copy to see if it ever was a legal term but I honestly just assumed the OP was austrailian or something and this was correct by their standards.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

Would you surmise the percentage of Trump ballots by mail is substantially lower than Biden?

They ignored the law, then ignored two orders to follow the law, what other recourse could there be? "Ok, we will let it slide this time."? The only way I can see that they could correct it, is to toss out all of them, as they made it impossible to tell the difference on purpose.

From my understanding, and please any lawyer types correct me, these ballots don't really matter until they are certified by the state. SO all the ballots could be casted for one side or the other fraudulently, and it won't matter if the state doesn't put them into the official count. This might be why everyone is trying to push their opponents into conceding the election.

If a state officially counts these fraudulent ballots as part of the official count, then the people involved violated the law, but until a state has certified their counts... none of this matters.

a reply to: Guyfriday

That pretty much sums up the preface. The next chapter is what happens if no one gets 270.

this is a nice short read on what follows

a reply to: drewlander

I would.


Would you be ok with throwing out a bunch of legal votes just because there dem and mixed in with some illegal votes?

Some of those illegal votes could be republican votes.

Then in 2024 the dems put in some illegal votes on purpose that will get mixed with a bunch of repub votes just to get those all thrown out.

This really doesn't sound like a real law to me at all.