No one was talking about you, we were talking about @Old Man Jingles namesake. Everyone knows what you are.But enough about you.
why are you trying to litigate the case here? This is silly. The trump lawyers have tons of sworn statements they would like to present in a court of law. they and various voter groups have tried to present their evidence to 60 different courts and no one will let them even try to present their evidence. Its all out there if you would get off your lazy rear and research it. But you obviously dont want to know anything that ruins your happy ending.The electors ballots were counted and certified. What courts remain for Rudy to go crying to? There's none left How many more times do the ballots have to be counted? If any wide spread election fraud did exist every opportunity was made available for the plaintiffs to finally present it. And the judges themselves thoroughly investigated the matter themselves and quite a number of them were trump employees.
The Republican State Legislators are passing around suggestions.why are you trying to litigate the case here? This is silly. The trump lawyers have tons of sworn statements they would like to present in a court of law. they and various voter groups have tried to present their evidence to 60 different courts and no one will let them even try to present their evidence. Its all out there if you would get off your lazy rear and research it. But you obviously dont want to know anything that ruins your happy ending.
There are hundreds of sworn affidavits of Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster but I don't think the Supreme Court is going to hear any of their cases either. Try the National Enquirer. Maybe they will buy your story and put it on page 1.why are you trying to litigate the case here? This is silly. The trump lawyers have tons of sworn statements they would like to present in a court of law. they and various voter groups have tried to present their evidence to 60 different courts and no one will let them even try to present their evidence. Its all out there if you would get off your lazy rear and research it. But you obviously dont want to know anything that ruins your happy ending.
What good does that do when they can just rewrite them going around the legislature whenever they want?The Republican State Legislators are passing around suggestions.
Laws will be changed!
Eliminate the weak spots in the laws.What good does that do when they can just rewrite them going around the legislature whenever they want?
Tell that to the scotus.Eliminate the weak spots in the laws.
Bring lawsuits against the States Judicial systems.
One can't just give up on our Constitution!
yes this is an election . voters would like some transparency. take the evidence to court , review it . swear in and cross examine the complaintants some of who are democrats and then determine whether there is valid evidence or not. its real simple but like the post you responded to , you will argue against it because you dont want to know the answer.There are hundreds of sworn affidavits of Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster but I don't think the Supreme Court is going to hear any of their cases either. Try the National Enquirer. Maybe they will buy your story and put it on page 1.
There are hundreds of sworn affidavits of Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster but I don't think the Supreme Court is going to hear any of their cases either. Try the National Enquirer. Maybe they will buy your story and put it on page 1.
The courts openly and repeatedly requested from the plaintiffs the evidence required to back their claims. They were granted hearings when they established legal standing and precedent . The next step was to present evidence at the level required to support their motions. So don't just stand there and say that they weren't given the opportunity. Furthermore how often is a motion made by the plaintiff is given the opportunity to be argued in front of 60 different state and federal courts?why are you trying to litigate the case here? This is silly. The trump lawyers have tons of sworn statements they would like to present in a court of law. they and various voter groups have tried to present their evidence to 60 different courts and no one will let them even try to present their evidence. Its all out there if you would get off your lazy rear and research it. But you obviously dont want to know anything that ruins your happy ending.
You mean like Pennsylvania where the GOP controlled legislature enthusiastically backed the mail in ballot law but when the results turned out to be the complete opposite of what they expect from their little scheme they run off to the PASC and SCOTUS to try to have the mail ins all thrown out. Are these the changes you're taking about?The Republican State Legislators are passing around suggestions.
Laws will be changed!
You see that's the issue. In who's actual court of law were those affidavits sworn? In many cases the affidavits came from bystanders not court appointed poll workers and election officials. Such as the person claiming to have seen ballots being unloaded at the back of a poll in a rental truck and tried to claim that some type of election fraud was being undertaken That was until the county kindly explained to the poor dumb soul that the county does rent trucks as needed to transport ballots.There are hundreds of sworn affidavits of Big Foot and the Loch Ness monster but I don't think the Supreme Court is going to hear any of their cases either. Try the National Enquirer. Maybe they will buy your story and put it on page 1.
Whatever works.You mean like Pennsylvania where the GOP controlled legislature enthusiastically backed the mail in ballot law but when the results turned out to be the complete opposite of what they expect from their little scheme they run off to the PASC and SCOTUS to try to have the mail ins all thrown out. Are these the changes you're taking about?
I grew up in the Washington DC area surrounded by current and former military, in my personal as well as work life. I’ve found that most current and former military are very patriotic whether they agree with the war they might have fought in or not.Did he say it word for word to go after the capital ? No but did he imply it ? Now we can’t make someone else responsible for others action but let’s now look at how he has handled it. Where is the press conference condemning what happened ? Where is the sympathy for the dead? Where do we go from here? The lack of action to me says it all. I am so tired of hearing his name I just can’t wait until he is gone.
As White people had to hear all last summer from the BLM and other people trying to convince them they were racist, silence is complicity.Seriously. I never once heard a Democratic leader claim that it was acceptable to riot and loot.
I agree with you. There were a lot of people at the capital and not all of them acted out. I am all for people’s right to protest but when you take it too far I feel you must be punished as an example to others.I grew up in the Washington DC area surrounded by current and former military, in my personal as well as work life. I’ve found that most current and former military are very patriotic whether they agree with the war they might have fought in or not.
For one of them to desecrate the Capitol is kind of akin to a Christian peeing on the Bible or a Muslim peeing on the Quran. For anyone ready to say I’m comparing patriotism to religion, no, that’s not my intent. My point is, there were thousands of patriotic people who went to DC to try to make their voices heard. You can’t compare those people to the idiots who desecrated the Capitol.
The question is where were the police?I agree with you. There were a lot of people at the capital and not all of them acted out. I am all for people’s right to protest but when you take it too far I feel you must be punished as an example to others.
Better late than never:The question is where were the police?