BREAKING: List of 23,305 FAKE Pennsylvania mail-in ballots published online

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: GravitySucks

originally posted by: GravitySucks

Nope. Not gonna happen, or there will be a revolution in GA.

Also, I've pointed out before, there is at least one - and I bet there are other - democrat Senators that aren't going to go along with crap like packing the courts. Joe Manchin is on the record saying explicitly that he won't vote for packing the court.

Nah, there won't be a revolution. People here are sick of the crooker governor and do-nothing senators. Trust.

I for one hope we wind up with 13 justices, like Jesus at the Last Supper. Turnabout and all that.

Oh yeah? what happens when they rule the constitution unconstitutional and no more judges after?

They'll just borrow a page from Whitmer and ignore the SCOTUS when it tells them they can't.

True she hasn't ignored the Federal Supreme, but she has ignored her state Supreme.

a reply to: Byrd

What about the ones who were turned away when they tried to do what you say they could had done? Some were told leave or be arrested.

originally posted by: GravitySucks
I for one hope we wind up with 13 justices, like Jesus at the Last Supper. Turnabout and all that.

So you wish for the destruction of our nation.

Glad you are in the tiny radical powerless (now that the majority are finally waking up) minority.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: Byrd

What about the ones who were turned away when they tried to do what you say they could had done? Some were told leave or be arrested.

Haven't you heard? Fake news. There was no fraud. There were no poll watchers turned away or prevented from seeing the ballots.

originally posted by: GravitySucks
a reply to: Byrd
Plus didn't Trump encourage voting by absentee/mail-in ballot and then showing up to vote in person? To, you know, test the security of the system? Seems it worked.

He said to do that to make sure your vote was actually counted. Since we now know they trashed millions of Trump mail-in votes or just counted them for Obiden, it wasn't bad advice.

Anyone who knows anything knows that this wasn't a suggestion to 'vote twice'.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

nothing to see here, I am sure its all just a big misunderstanding.

So much was odd about this election and so many people want to pretend otherwise and that is far scarier than any biden harris election.

If there was anything to see here, why is Trump himself not putting it forward in court? It's a simple question with a simple answer. There actually is nothing to see here. I mean do you all really think that you have discovered the smoking gun that no one on Trump's legal team has seen?

Believe this is breaking. Yet another loss in PA.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismisses another election case brought by Republicans

On Friday, a federal appeals court dealt the Trump campaign's effort another blow, with a Trump-appointed judge writing in a scathing opinion that the campaign's lawsuit lacked proof and that its allegations in Pennsylvania "have no merit."

The court opinion also rejected Trump's motion to undo Pennsylvania's certification of votes, calling it "unprecedented" and "breathtaking" relief where no fraud had been alleged.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: GravitySucks
a reply to: Byrd
Plus didn't Trump encourage voting by absentee/mail-in ballot and then showing up to vote in person? To, you know, test the security of the system? Seems it worked.

He said to do that to make sure your vote was actually counted. Since we now know they trashed millions of Trump mail-in votes or just counted them for Obiden, it wasn't bad advice.

Anyone who knows anything knows that this wasn't a suggestion to 'vote twice'.

No, he said to do it to test the system, and the system in this particular discussion worked. They caught when people had already voted.

Mr. Trump encouraged people to send in an absentee ballot and then go vote in person on Election Day.

“Let them send it in and let them go vote, and if their system’s as good as they say it is, then obviously they won’t be able to vote,” the president said. “If it isn’t tabulated, they’ll be able to vote.”

Voting twice in the same election is illegal.

But Mr. Trump’s suggestion that people should vote twice is one he has discussed privately with aides in recent weeks amid concerns he is depressing turnout among his supporters by raising alarms about the security of mail-in voting. Link

Sounds to me like he was planting seeds there in NC.

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

nothing to see here, I am sure its all just a big misunderstanding.

So much was odd about this election and so many people want to pretend otherwise and that is far scarier than any biden harris election.

If there was anything to see here, why is Trump himself not putting it forward in court? It's a simple question with a simple answer. There actually is nothing to see here. I mean do you all really think that you have discovered the smoking gun that no one on Trump's legal team has seen?

I didnt really articulate it here, but I have spoken many times since the election. It does not matter if it was stolen or not what matters is showing people that have questions they had nothing to fear and keeping faith in the election with the people.
At this point it seems the media and the DNC want to sweep everything aside and move forward like nothing possible could have happened.
At least 1 state violated their own constitution, and the media wants to pretend its nothing.

I say do every recount people want, no matter who wins it would help alleviate the fear of impropriety keep faith in the nations election high.

ETA: I didnt vote for a republican or for a democrat, both parties brought us to this point.

a reply to: yuppa

That's a bit of a long shot. Who's going to rule this?

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

nothing to see here, I am sure its all just a big misunderstanding.

So much was odd about this election and so many people want to pretend otherwise and that is far scarier than any biden harris election.

If there was anything to see here, why is Trump himself not putting it forward in court? It's a simple question with a simple answer. There actually is nothing to see here. I mean do you all really think that you have discovered the smoking gun that no one on Trump's legal team has seen?

I didnt really articulate it here, but I have spoken many times since the election. It does not matter if it was stolen or not what matters is showing people that have questions they had nothing to fear and keeping faith in the election with the people.
At this point it seems the media and the DNC want to sweep everything aside and move forward like nothing possible could have happened.
At least 1 state violated their own constitution, and the media wants to pretend its nothing.

I say do every recount people want, no matter who wins it would help alleviate the fear of impropriety keep faith in the nations election high.

ETA: I didnt vote for a republican or for a democrat, both parties brought us to this point.

What state violated its constitution? PA? GravitySucks literally just posted a link to the PA Supreme Court affirming the dismissal of that case (two posts above your original post).

No one is trying to sweep anything under the rug--there is literally nothing to swept. The only thing causing a loss of faith is people irresponsibly ranting about a stolen election without facts or evidence to back it up.

a reply to: GravitySucks

Umm old decision there. try to keep up.

a reply to: johnnylaw16

PA broke their own laws by ignoring the legislature if i remember correctly. The PA judge is apparently a bough toff judge if they dismissed it.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: GravitySucks

Umm old decision there. try to keep up.

This is not an old decision: pittsburgh.cbslocal.com...

Credit to GravitySucks for flagging this decision in another thread.

a reply to: johnnylaw16

NO. Credit for the scum who sit on that stacked Supreme court in PA. The REAL Supreme court should hear this case now because it was clearly breaking the law,because in PA they have to pass a law to change the mail in date,which they did not. Smug bastards all of those traitors with a D or a R(ino) in front their names. I want a fire sale.

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: johnnylaw16

NO. Credit for the scum who sit on that stacked Supreme court in PA. The REAL Supreme court should hear this case now because it was clearly breaking the law,because in PA they have to pass a law to change the mail in date,which they did not. Smug bastards all of those traitors with a D or a R(ino) in front their names. I want a fire sale.

A little touchy when things don't go your way, I see? At any rate, the law is pretty clear here: The case was clearly untimely. As the opinion points out, the plaintiffs had quite a bit of time to challenge this law, but saw no reason to do so until they lost and the deadline had passed.

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: johnnylaw16

NO. Credit for the scum who sit on that stacked Supreme court in PA. The REAL Supreme court should hear this case now because it was clearly breaking the law,because in PA they have to pass a law to change the mail in date,which they did not. Smug bastards all of those traitors with a D or a R(ino) in front their names. I want a fire sale.

A little touchy when things don't go your way, I see? At any rate, the law is pretty clear here: The case was clearly untimely. As the opinion points out, the plaintiffs had quite a bit of time to challenge this law, but saw no reason to do so until they lost and the deadline had passed.

No whats bad is the lower court found merit,but the higher one did not because they are in on the joke and corrupt. hope they are added to a list of subversives. They wont find it funny when the people rise up and start killing Traitors i bet.

a reply to: yuppa

They were elected by the people. Shall we go back and revisit all those elections too?

a reply to: johnnylaw16

State supreme court ignored the law initially, of course they will dismiss the lawsuit that's why the court of appeals exists.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: johnnylaw16

State supreme court ignored the law initially, of course they will dismiss the lawsuit that's why the court of appeals exists.

Not sure what you're saying here? The state supreme court is a court of appeal, and when did they "initially" ignore the law?