I agree, they do not want to go down in the history books as lakeys for Trump.
The election litigation thread
- Thread starter Dutch Oven
- Start date
You read the affadavits and didn't find them laughable?
We have very different noses.
They are unconvincing to you because you are not a reasonable objective person.
Mockery, more than trolling.
It really isn't. You just don't understand that.
Of course motive + opportunity equals cheating. Why do you think the GOP keeps getting caught for voter fraud?
The question is what motives and what opportunity are there.
Your logic is "I know they must have cheated - its what we would do - so I just need to find proof" .
In the meantime, the point of the PR campaign is to reinforce that "I know they must have cheated" part to undermine the legitimacy of the election.
You keep saying "they have to investigate" but that's only because what you mean is "they have to investigate until they prove I am right".
People are dismissive because there is a point where kids stop believing in Santa without demanding further investigations.
He didn't really, though. There was high turnout and people did expect it to be on both sides. (Some people thought he wouldn't get that turnout spike but that was mostly wishful thinking)
The percentage difference seems off but we don't have final numbers yet. It is possible that the numbers reflect voter suppression of the Democrats, yes, but I don't think we can conclude that yet.
The theory that there was massive in-person voter fraud by the GOP doesn't seem plausible because in-person voter fraud is insignificant overall.
You have what they have presented in court and in public.
Which is nothing.
Point to these? I haven't seen any like this yet.
If that were true, you would be discussing the suits (which does mean discussing the evidence I am afraid).
Where are they? How are they faring? Do they have merit?
Even if they were successful what would change?
Why aren't you doing any of that?
They have a law requiring a risk-limiting audit if the vote is within a certain margin.
This is completely normal and part of the protections that Dutch Oven seems to think don't exist.
I think the most a recount has ever moved something is around 700 votes.
The recount/audit was also announced back on November 6 when Trump was ahead because it was obvious it was going to be close and they have a law.
He seems to think that clip shows Biden in a lie because Biden said he wouldn't accept victory until it was independently certified and the votes were counted and Biden didn't declare victory until various independent groups called the elections for him.
The fact Biden is still phrasing it as letting the process play out and it will show he won is probably part of this dastardly lie because now we know that this means he can't declare victory until December 14. That's what he secretly promised in that clip if you squint and go "la la la la la la".
The Trump legal team has said they are taking an incremental and methodical approach to the litigation. They have said most of the early suits are about getting access to information. I feel pretty confident that they are from from being out of ammunition at this early stage.
Any suit that claims being denied oversight over the counting will claim as relief a right to review the ballots and to audit the tabulation procedures. I would have thought you'd be able to connect those dots without me.
The original post of the thread gives you a link to check in on the status of each of the cases, and provides a summary of any judicial rulings. TERBites discussing evidence that they think they kinda-sorta understand and making their own findings of fact means didley-squat.
It has always been an option.
There is nothing in the constitution explicitly stating that people can vote for president.
You can make an argument involving the civil rights amendments, but it is only state law that says "ok, we will listen to what the people say" and nothing stops you from changing that law.
These wouldn't be faithless electors, it would involve sending an entirely new slate.
What information have the asked for access to?
Have you read the suits? Is that what they are asking for?
So you don't know because you haven't bothered to read these yourself an be up on them?
You're just supporting the voter fraud narrative but can't be bothered to read and learn for yourself what is being alleged?
You keep making claims about what these suits are about and what remedies they are claiming but seem weirdly reluctant to look at the links you yourself posted and back those statements up.
Bill Maher brought that up on his show...it’s just scaring people, it’s not going to happen.
No, I'm reasonably reluctant to act as anyone's articling student. The information is there, if you care to read it.
So we should ignore whatever you say about these because you are just repeating what the GOP tells you and haven't bothered to look into any of it yourself?
So far, all I've said about them is that they exist, and in general terms what each one is about, as well as the status or disposition of some of them. If you think I was saying more, you should definitely stop reading this thread, because you're getting something out of it that's not there. Of course, you're always welcome to ignore anything said here on this thread, or any thread, for any reason that suits you.
I can tell you that I've looked at all the suits, some in detail, and some in a cursory fashion. But I didn't do so to save anyone else the trouble. I tend to wait for the final disposition of cases to talk about them in greater detail, other than to mention some of the issues that the court will have to deal with. Not enough for you? Plenty of legal blogs out there for you to read.
Looks like the grift is even more blatant than I thought.
www.reuters.com
Donations under $8K to Trump ‘election defense’ instead go to president, RNC
[...]
That means that, before a dollar goes into the recount fund, Save America would receive $5,000 and the RNC around $3,300.
Donations under $8K to Trump ‘election defense’ instead go to president, RNC
As President Donald Trump seeks to discredit last week's election with baseless claims of voter fraud, his team has bombarded his supporters with requests for money to help pay for legal challenges to the results: “The Left will try to STEAL this election!” reads one text.
www.reuters.com
Donations under $8K to Trump ‘election defense’ instead go to president, RNC
[...]
That means that, before a dollar goes into the recount fund, Save America would receive $5,000 and the RNC around $3,300.
Update on one of the Pennsylvania cases. Trump team successful in challenging change to mail-in ballot deadline:
3rd time that Trump legal team met with some success, for those keeping score.
3rd time that Trump legal team met with some success, for those keeping score.
Last edited:
Those votes that were challenged haven't been counted and don't affect the 60,000 vote lead that Biden has...also, it wasn't voter fraud, it was human error on a decision by an election official.
Another Trump victory was being to have their poll watchers stand six feet back instead of ten...Trump called that a major victory.
The third one was to re-afirm a previous decision of separating late incoming ballots but continue to count them.
It's all about the narrative. "We are litigating in court and getting wins" is all that matters to building the story that Trump wuz robbed!"
Similar threads
