The TIDE HAS TURNED! The Biden Vote FRAUD Is About to IMPLODE!!!

a reply to: Lumenari

Serving, feeding.

Same difference.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: djz3ro

Your link has nothing to do with the Statement you quoted. The legislature in PA can refuse to certify their EC representatives and take back their power since it was never legally transferred by a law. A resolution in PA carries the force of law in that state.

It will be just like all the other empty threats from Team Trump since Nov.4th

I've got a big problem with Wisconsin's "indefinitely-confined" ballots.

I hope they get tossed.

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: whyamIhere

Can anyone point to one significant victory.

I'll give you two.
Pennsylvania has been ordered by a judge to halt certification, which is unprecedented in this country's history.

The Pennsylvania legislature is now in the process of revoking the secretary of states authority to appoint electors. This does NOT necessarily mean PA will appoint Trump electors. It means they are halting the appointment of electors until they are satisfied with the results of the election, possibly after a full audit.

Pennsylvania?

Sorry, no...

Judge halts further vote certification...

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — A Pennsylvania appeals court judge ordered state officials on Wednesday to halt any further steps toward certifying election results, a day after Gov. Tom Wolf said he had certified Democrat Joe Biden as the winner of the presidential election in Pennsylvania.

I don't think the governors appeal has gone through yet, but I could be wrong. I saw the case you posted, but I think it's a different case. I will look into it and make sure.

originally posted by: RAY1990
I've been asking why a higher court would be open to taking a case that has already concluded. I've yet to find an answer.

It is called an 'appeal'. Look it up.

There'll be different terminology but I can't imagine the process is much different. In the UK you can appeal to have a case looked at again, a case can be referred to a higher court. I'm not seeing the logic behind taking a lost case to a higher court.

To get it overturned. Happens all the time. Look it up.

Civil courts maybe? but they hold little authority.

Really? They handed an election that had been calle3d for Gore to Bush in 2000. Look it up.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Really? They handed an election that had been calle3d for Gore to Bush in 2000. Look it up.

That kind of info messes with their narrative.

Here is a thought for ya this one is free. The amount of evidence is so overwhelming, massive, and widespread that it is not in their jurisdiction to try them.

a reply to: RAY1990

originally posted by: Klassified
The Pennsylvania legislature is now in the process of revoking the secretary of states authority to appoint electors. This does NOT necessarily mean PA will appoint Trump electors. It means they are halting the appointment of electors until they are satisfied with the results of the election, possibly after a full audit.

2 things about this...

First, the State Legislature did not have the authority to delegate this power to the Governor, since the Constitution did not specifically allow it to be delegated. See the legal doctrine "Delegatus Non Potest Delegare".

Second, while you are correct that the State Legislature doesn't have to appoint Trump electors, they almost certainly would, or every single R Rep would face a massive backlash come their next elections - so they'd need to be very comfortable that Dominion was still going to be around to make sure they won.

originally posted by: yuppa
The legislature in PA can refuse to certify their EC representatives and take back their power since it was never legally transferred by a law.

Further, they do not have the lawful authority to delegate their power to appoint electors, to the Governor or anyone else.

Delegatus Non Potest Delegare.

a reply to: Doctor Smith


Dude this is just as sad as 2016 mate.
Maybe time to accept reality man.
It sucks both ways, yet one will Atleast take action in a inconvenient way to help minimize the spread.
Trump just decided to ignore it.
He would have had this in the bag had he combat it.
Yet he ignored it. And now people wonder why he lost.....
Imagine a family member losing a life and that resonated through ones family and so on.
And after hearing Woodwards takes. How would you feel mate?

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Klassified
The Pennsylvania legislature is now in the process of revoking the secretary of states authority to appoint electors. This does NOT necessarily mean PA will appoint Trump electors. It means they are halting the appointment of electors until they are satisfied with the results of the election, possibly after a full audit.

2 things about this...

First, the State Legislature did not have the authority to delegate this power to the Governor, since the Constitution did not specifically allow it to be delegated. See the legal doctrine "Delegatus Non Potest Delegare".

Second, while you are correct that the State Legislature doesn't have to appoint Trump electors, they almost certainly would, or every single R Rep would face a massive backlash come their next elections - so they'd need to be very comfortable that Dominion was still going to be around to make sure they won.

Agreed on both points.

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xavi1000

Most Democrats are too lazy to look at those documents, and probably wouldn't understand what they are describing anyway.

But according to the Rasmussen poll, 30% of them do understand that you cannot have more votes returned than there are registered voters.

Didn't Giuliani himself back pedal recently and say that wasn't the case?

I think he did...

All I see is your (gossip, low level, National Enquirer,) type paper claiming that Rudy back peddled. I don't see any clip of him back peddling. So I don't believe. Even if true their is obviously massive amounts of fraud that is documented.

Pennsylvania State Judge Upholds Halt To Certification, Finds Likelihood Mail-In Balloting Procedures Violate PA Constitution
legalinsurrection.com... on/

This was a MAJOR FRAUD | Rudy Giuliani News Max update

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xavi1000

Most Democrats are too lazy to look at those documents, and probably wouldn't understand what they are describing anyway.

But according to the Rasmussen poll, 30% of them do understand that you cannot have more votes returned than there are registered voters.

Lol. Now that’s funny.

reason they didn' go after all of the
fraud before the election
was so it could be exposed.

Our elections to come should really be
honest after all this. Have to careful of
the cheaters in Georgia.


I don't think chasing after the crooks
before they commited the crime
would not have been as effective .


a reply to: Allaroundyou

Reason they didn't go after all of the
fraud before the election
was so it could be exposed.

Our elections to come should really be
honest after all this. Have to careful of
the cheaters in Georgia.


I don't think chasing after the crooks
before they commited the crime
would not have been as effective .


a reply to: Allaroundyou

originally posted by: RAY1990
I've been asking why a higher court would be open to taking a case that has already concluded. I've yet to find an answer.

There'll be different terminology but I can't imagine the process is much different. In the UK you can appeal to have a case looked at again, a case can be referred to a higher court. I'm not seeing the logic behind taking a lost case to a higher court.

Civil courts maybe? but they hold little authority.

You can appeal both State and Federal suits up to the respective Supreme Court via the appeals process although there is no guarantee that it will make it that far, the United States Supreme Court only hears around 170-180 cases a year out of the thousands of requests.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xavi1000

Most Democrats are too lazy to look at those documents, and probably wouldn't understand what they are describing anyway.

But according to the Rasmussen poll, 30% of them do understand that you cannot have more votes returned than there are registered voters.

Link please.