Are we on the brink of civil war 2.0?

refineryworker05

Well-Known Member
Step back and look at this. trump conceded days ago, trump is not discussing the election, gop elected officials are not discussing the election, and yet mfers on here are still in their delusions about voter fraud. As I have pointed out, and it is a point that remains undisputed, trump's lawyers never claim voter fraud in court. Not once have his lawyers claimed voter fraud in court, so why are these mfers still talking about voter fraud? it is pathetic and delusional.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Step back and look at this. trump conceded days ago, trump is not discussing the election, gop elected officials are not discussing the election, and yet mfers on here are still in their delusions about voter fraud. As I have pointed out, and it is a point that remains undisputed, trump's lawyers never claim voter fraud in court. Not once have his lawyers claimed voter fraud in court, so why are these mfers still talking about voter fraud? it is pathetic and delusional.
:runcirclsmiley2:
 

1989

Well-Known Member
That was at a hearing being conducted by the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. There were a lot of suits, I haven't read through them all. I think Lin Wood and Sidney Powell were alleging fraud. I didn't really look through their suits. Trump's team didn't go the fraud route because the difficulties involved in proving it. With having to coordinate efforts in 5 or 6 states in a very short amount of time, and no access to party resources, Trump's team had to make due with whatever support they could get from Republican parties at the state level, and the resources of the Trump campaign.

Lawyers develop their strategies to try to get the desired outcome with the approach that is most likely to achieve the outcome.

"In law it is a good policy to never plead what you need not, lest you oblige yourself to prove what you can not."

-Abraham Lincoln

For the most part Trump's team went after the electors clause issues. Outside the courts, they were trying to force signature audits, especially in Georgia, when they shouldn't have had to force them, and, as far as I know, some counties in Georgia were never audited. Signature challenges generally disqualify enough ballots that it could have actually flipped Georgia back to Trump. The problem in Georgia is that the Democratic party sued the Secretary of State to get the signature challenge rules changed, circumventing the State Legislature, which is where the Electors Clause comes in.

Bear in mind, signature challenges were how Obama disqualified his primary opponents for Illinois State Senate.
Wierd,,, they claim wide spread voter fraud, then when called out on their claims they deny those claims. You cannot start a court case in order to obtain evidence hoping to find i crime. All they have are unsupported suspicions beliefs.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Wrong. You have to establish lack of standing, and can only do that upon hearing the evidence through discovery. The motions to dismiss were based on laches doctrine, meaning it was too late for the courts to provide remedy, which is debateable. The Judges went for that because none of them wanted to get involved. Other cases were turned down, mostly lawsuits from parties other than Trump, because they had other avenues for
Wrong.
 

allahuakbar

She/Her
I’m really hoping for a civil war. There’s like 3 dudes at my hub that have fully stocked houses and no guns. All ya gotta do is shoot one kid and they’ll give you everything.
 

Macbrother

Well-Known Member
Standing is determined through evidentiary processes. No discovery, no determination of lack of standing. The cases were dismissed on motions to dismiss before they ever got to discovery, in almost all cases. One case from Wisconsin, that was an actual Trump case, was dismissed because the state courts said it was a federal case, not their jurisdiction. That was an actual electors clause case. The Supreme Court wouldn't hear the Texas case for the opposite reason, saying Texas had to take it up with the Pennsylvania courts. But the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over disputes between states.

Everything you've claimed about the court cases is all incorrect. Sorry. If you actually knew what really happened, you might understand why people are skeptical about the election.

Respectfully, take a step back, and imagine your position were reversed. Imagine it was Trump who was certified. Now imagine it was the democrats claiming fraud, posting sketchy videos of vans with cabinets, stacks of paper which are "seemingly" ballots, affidavits, whatever you want. Now imagine the democrats brought and lost over 60 court cases at the state, federal, and supreme court level. What would be your instinct? That the democrats "really have something here?" Or they were a people and party who could not accept defeat? Which is more likely here?

It's very easy to claim fraud. Much harder to prove it in a court of law. And your supposition that judges just "didn't want anything to do with it" is speculative, self-serving and unconvincing.
 

The Driver

I drive.
I’m really hoping for a civil war. There’s like 3 dudes at my hub that have fully stocked houses and no guns. All ya gotta do is shoot one kid and they’ll give you everything.
I don’t talk about my level of security but I can promise you someone wouldn’t want to find out the hard way.
 

Babagounj

Strength through joy
Should a shooting civil war actually start, don't expect Congress to stop it.
The Democrats now want the barriers around the Capitol Building to be permanent.
The Democrats wish to fine Republicans for not wearing a mask and if possible remove them all from office because they are their enemies.
The Democrats want all Trump supporters to be sent to re-education camps and be marked as social outcasts.
Thus not allowing them to be hired anywhere, without their expressed permission.
 

The Driver

I drive.
Should a shooting civil war actually start, don't expect Congress to stop it.
The Democrats now want the barriers around the Capitol Building to be permanent.
The Democrats wish to fine Republicans for not wearing a mask and if possible remove them all from office because they are their enemies.
The Democrats want all Trump supporters to be sent to re-education camps and be marked as social outcasts.
Thus not allowing them to be hired anywhere, without their expressed permission.
D1FLxy7WoAwkhY0.jpg
 

The Driver

I drive.
What the mater, you don't like the new rules coming from Congress by way of China.

China already has two conditions; everyone must have a cell phone and that phone will be monitored to judge you on your social activities thus developing your standing within the system.
We're not China.
 
Top