Judge Dismisses Charges in Backup Elector Case in Nevada

Now, I know the regulars will be here to say it will still be taken to the NVSC but it does not matter. This was all about the show it seems.

FAKE ELECTORS!!!!!

They have been screaming that in the MSM to try to make the MAGA look bad because they know what they did when they taped the windows and had a pipe leak.

The judge today dismissed charges because of lack of jurisdiction. Uhm, how was that not noticed this entire time? Just so happens now it becomes an issue?

Link

A Clark County judge has dismissed the charges filed against the six Nevada Republicans who submitted an invalid slate of electoral votes for former President Donald Trump in 2020 on the grounds that the county was not the appropriate jurisdiction for the case. At a Friday morning hearing in Clark County District Court, Judge Mary Kay Holthus said she was unconvinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the appropriate county to hear the case.

The electors’ attorneys had argued a more appropriate venue would be in Carson City, where the false signing ceremony took place, or in Douglas County, where the fake elector documents were originally mailed from. Clark County is more Democratic, meaning a jury could be less favorable to the Republican defendants. “You have literally, in my opinion, a crime that has occurred in another jurisdiction,” Holthus said. “It’s so appropriately up north and so appropriately not here.”

How will this fair for other cases? For this one, the case is over.

The state is unable to re-file the case up north because a three-year statute of limitations expired in December.

Why are the other cases also not 'slam dunks' as I hear people describe?

Just like so many other things, if there was something real it would have been a quick conviction. The nuke secrets anyone? The unravel begins as we head to the next election because at this point it will not help. They have a debate to worry about.

I'm awaiting the evidence that going to come out during the discovery process in the Georgia cases, if they are ever allowed to go forward.

"On the grounds that the county was not the appropriate jurisdiction for the case. At a Friday morning hearing in Clark County District Court, Judge Mary Kay Holthus said she was unconvinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the appropriate county to hear the case."

Don't worry, the RIGHT jurisdiction will be found. And no one said this case is over. Also, no one said those people DID NOT break the law. All they said was the court doesn't recognize the jurisdiction for the case.

Not a slam dunk by any means. My guess is the case will re-emerge with the proper jurisdiction sited.

a reply to: matafuchs

Hillary called them alternate electors, but with Trump it's the worst thing imaginable lol. Anyone still drunking that kool aid?

originally posted by: Disgusted123
"On the grounds that the county was not the appropriate jurisdiction for the case. At a Friday morning hearing in Clark County District Court, Judge Mary Kay Holthus said she was unconvinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the appropriate county to hear the case."

Don't worry, the RIGHT jurisdiction will be found. And no one said this case is over. Also, no one said those people DID NOT break the law. All they said was the court doesn't recognize the jurisdiction for the case.

Not a slam dunk by any means. My guess is the case will re-emerge with the proper jurisdiction sited.

So it is just the same as all the fraudulent voting that happened in 2020 that Judges said they couldn't even look at the evidence of because it wasn't the appropriate jurisdiction?

And then they let the clock run out?

Glad to know we're on the same page...

a reply to: Disgusted123

Don't worry, the RIGHT jurisdiction will be found. And no one said this case is over. Also, no one said those people DID NOT break the law. All they said was the court doesn't recognize the jurisdiction for the case.

You must have overlooked this part:

The state is unable to re-file the case up north because a three-year statute of limitations expired in December.

Or maybe you need to look up the meaning of "statute of limitations".

This case wasn't a complete loss for the lawfarist and propagandist though, they at least got their "optics" and narrative steered PR.

a reply to: Disgusted123

Statue of Limitations. This is why i put it up. Amazing how this ruling comes up a few months past the deadline even though the media was still talking after the deadline.

These are not hard things to find.

Is anyone awake?

MAGAFUCHS!

FTW!

a reply to: matafuchs

Unless the legislature jumps up and amends the statute of limitations like was done in NYC for the E. Jean Carroll case against Trump.

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: matafuchs

Unless the legislature jumps up and amends the statute of limitations like was done in NYC for the E. Jean Carroll case against Trump.

Not much chance of that happening in a mostly blue state, sadly.

originally posted by: nugget1

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: matafuchs

Unless the legislature jumps up and amends the statute of limitations like was done in NYC for the E. Jean Carroll case against Trump.

Not much chance of that happening in a mostly blue state, sadly.

What? Are you trying to say NYC or NY state isn't blue? They are as blue as the deep blue sea.

I’m starting to really worry that they are so behind they can’t possibly cheat enough, so the dems may pull a page from Putin and rid themselves of the competition.

originally posted by: charlest2

originally posted by: nugget1

originally posted by: charlest2
a reply to: matafuchs

Unless the legislature jumps up and amends the statute of limitations like was done in NYC for the E. Jean Carroll case against Trump.

Not much chance of that happening in a mostly blue state, sadly.

What? Are you trying to say NYC or NY state isn't blue? They are as blue as the deep blue sea.

No, I'm saying like New York Nevada is unlikely to pursue anything that might be beneficial to conservatives. They've already proven that until waiting until the final hour to make a decision on hearing the case.

originally posted by: Disgusted123
"On the grounds that the county was not the appropriate jurisdiction for the case. At a Friday morning hearing in Clark County District Court, Judge Mary Kay Holthus said she was unconvinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the appropriate county to hear the case."

Don't worry, the RIGHT jurisdiction will be found. And no one said this case is over. Also, no one said those people DID NOT break the law. All they said was the court doesn't recognize the jurisdiction for the case.

Not a slam dunk by any means. My guess is the case will re-emerge with the proper jurisdiction sited.

My guess is it won't cause it is BS anyway.

a reply to: matafuchs

fun fact. This is the same judge that was attacked in the viral video a few months ago . When the defendant leaped over the podium.

Maybe she has had enough

originally posted by: Disgusted123
"On the grounds that the county was not the appropriate jurisdiction for the case. At a Friday morning hearing in Clark County District Court, Judge Mary Kay Holthus said she was unconvinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the appropriate county to hear the case."

Don't worry, the RIGHT jurisdiction will be found. And no one said this case is over. Also, no one said those people DID NOT break the law. All they said was the court doesn't recognize the jurisdiction for the case.

Not a slam dunk by any means. My guess is the case will re-emerge with the proper jurisdiction sited.

I don’t think so.

The State can appeal the decision to dismiss the case. If that decision is overturned then the trial can go ahead in that original court.

But if the appeal is denied, it is too late to start over in a new jurisdiction.

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: Disgusted123
"On the grounds that the county was not the appropriate jurisdiction for the case. At a Friday morning hearing in Clark County District Court, Judge Mary Kay Holthus said she was unconvinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the appropriate county to hear the case."

Don't worry, the RIGHT jurisdiction will be found. And no one said this case is over. Also, no one said those people DID NOT break the law. All they said was the court doesn't recognize the jurisdiction for the case.

Not a slam dunk by any means. My guess is the case will re-emerge with the proper jurisdiction sited.

I don’t think so.

The State can appeal the decision to dismiss the case. If that decision is overturned then the trial can go ahead in that original court.

But if the appeal is denied, it is too late to start over in a new jurisdiction.

The whole thing is too late. they tried to time this stuff by the election. Waited till Trump declared on several of these bogus Kangaroo court cases.