Any word on if they all go one direction?

Or no one would want to be a head of state if you prosecuted your heads of state after their terms... is more likely

able to avoid prosecution implies it's the individuals effort to do so. It's not. It's a procedural necessity to have a head of state at all.

I'm curious as to where you're getting that these are minor complaints? I watched the hearings all last week. The complaints are of systemic cheating. So similar in the different states that it's easy to conclude that it was organized from a central source. They're not petty by any means.

Accusation under the penalty of perjury is evidence.

And multiple accusations of the same thing from unaffiliated people is compelling evidence

There is certainly more to be seen which is why it needs to be heard in a court that will allow the evidence to be seen and parsed.

I can't defend what I don't know the details of. I'm defending the idea that these cases need to be heard in court where they can happen and get to the root of things

Then let's hear it in court.

You're welcome to your ideas. If you have a case bring it to the court

That wouldn't explain why this election went the way it did because all the states involved violated their election procedures

The courts are expediting the cases. The attorneys involved can do what they can do. Saying it's hard is no excuse for not trying

The hearings are, I think, for two purposes. First, to get the legislatures to use their power to nullify results, overturn the results or choose electors based on what the results really were prior to the cheating... and second, for public awareness so people can actually hear the witnesses where as the courts keep making that impossible.

So you think a court hearing would reinforce a lie?

No, give Trump the chance to prove he was robbed.

If he wasn't, then the court should be able to figure that out

?

how can we know if we don't hear all the evidence?

you're making a conclusion on incomplete information

If you were basing it off election law then you would have to give the election to Trump because all the states involved violated their own election law

it's no longer a states issue when it affects the national election

it is

at least the disputes are

so take it to the courts and make that determination... this isn't hard. Just let the investigations happen. Why fight it?

I think you're looking at it from a perspective regarding the legal framework which I understand. But there is a political perspective that you seem to be missing. There were ~74 million Trump voters using the numbers given. A poll was done recently that stated over 50% believed that the election was stolen. That is approaching 40 million people that do not accept that Biden won the election. This issue needs to be resolved or you are seriously risking a civil war.

It's going to be hard times either way. But everyone deserves due process, even the President of the United States. This needs to be heard in the courts for the good of the nation. If we can't trust our election results the United States is over.

I'm not sure where you're not getting your news but there is plenty of evidence that has the potential to turn over the election and that needs to be thoroughly investigated in order to determine it's validity.

The hearings in front of the legislatures this week offered all kinds of evidence. The accusations made by the affiants are evidence because they submitted the affidavits which puts them under penalty of perjury. There is video in Georgia. There are statistical improbabilities that are so egregious to the point of being impossible. There is much evidence and it needs to be heard in court.

The only acceptable levels of deviation are levels that have no ability to change the result. There is enough evidence is all the disputed states to change the result.

This would be an indication of bias on your part.

You're going to have to be more specific. Way too many cases going on for that kind of generality.

If it's not a thing it can be proven in court. Keeping it out of the courts just raises suspicion.

what 'ballot requesting software'? what even is that

the irregularities can be proven in court. the violation of state election law can be proven in court. Why not let it be hashed out in court?

404 - Not Found

but I got your point from the link. You're talking about voters requesting their absentee ballots.

So, are you saying that no one received an absentee ballot that didn't request it?

Right, because that's not what happened. With the mail in voting that Kemp illegally allowed in the state they sent ballots to anyone and everyone they could to the point where no one knows how many mail in ballots were out there.

There are only 3 lawsuits brought by the Trump legal team. All the other suits are by individuals on their own behalf.

Don't know for sure. The one machine they checked in Ware County, GA showed that 37 votes on that machine had been transferred from Biden to Trump. They didn't say anything about other findings so I would assume it can't provide network information.

Which is why the witnesses saying they were kicked out and unable to observe the counting matter. And why the witnesses that say they saw them manually entering people into the poll books matter.

Which is why you gather a body of evidence. When you have dozens of witnesses saying the same thing it's fair to say at that point it becomes a fact.

Well guys. I truly have enjoyed this but I have errands to run. Be well.

Nice

It's not mandatory anywhere yet. Just people talking about making it mandatory. Then there are the stories about how Pharmaceutical companies have no liability if the vaccine harms you. The fact that it was developed in less than a year which is incredibly short amount of time to develop a vaccine which means they skimped on testing. It just opens the door for a lot of things to go wrong and closes the door for you to do anything about it.

It's stuff like this that's concerning... https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200914/nih-and-fda-examine-serious-side-effect-that-surfaced-in-covid-vaccine-trial#1

Nothing is ever forced at first

slippery slope argument

nope

they don't know what they don't know yet and they're rushing to give this to as many people as possible. Someone has some effed up logic.

Then you have this... https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases_casesper100klast7days

280,135 deaths / 14,462,527 cases = <2% death rate ... this isn't a pandemic

As best I can tell it's for the Global Reset

If you consider 2% death rate a pandemic then the flu is also a pandemic

It is a tangent of the topic but not directly part of it for sure

I find it ironic that you have a Marx avatar and you're saying you don't like totalitarians

do tell?

I know what Marxism means. I'm curious to know what you think it means.

Did you write a book?

because I want to know what you think. Not what someone else thinks.

it's a little more than 'encouraging' when you scare the hell out of people, destroy their livelihoods and then tell them you'll help them out if they take a vaccine.

have you not been paying attention to what's been happening in this country with Governors ,most egregiously in Democrat run states, are shutting don't all the businesses?

From what I understand she also included provisions for national mail-in voting... because it was so successful in this election

It's a virus. Eventually everyone is going to get it. That's what viruses do. This one happens to attack the elderly and people with underlying conditions and people with certain physiologies. In that respect it's also similar to the flu.

That's the point. Why are we rushing for a virus that is no worse than the flu?

My comment about the bill including national vote by mail was in reference to McConnell's role. Vote by mail is part of the scheme to steal elections. If they nationalize it, Dem's already have the infrastructure to abuse it. They never lose another election.

It's happening right before your eyes. open em up.

By who's standard? Have you not been paying attention to what's going on this week?

you literally have to ignore news stories not to see it

explain this... https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/thing-happened-michigan-happened-georgia-election-night-republicans-removed-counting-area-massive-ballot-drop-biden-votes/

and in case you were wondering, the put them side by side,

surprising how it lines up perfectly

lol

I understand why you think Marxism is good. You go through life with your eyes closed

You have to willfully ignore history to think Marxism is a good thing. You have to willfully ignore the news to not see the fraud in front of your eyes.

Sorry, that reply was meant for @Zuluzeit

Your avatar would seem to advocate for Marxism

Georgia hearings live now https://www.newsmaxtv.com/

yes, of course

lol. You're claiming that the Justices following the rule of law are activists. That's funny.

Not sure how he's losing when he hasn't been giving the opportunity to present a case yet.

literally have no idea what you're talking about. Evidence has not been produced in a case. The legal team that quit, quit because they were threatened in multiple ways. If you think submitting to thuggery is losing... well, not sure how to help you

As I recall the PA Supreme Court amended the act by allowing mail in votes to be returned up to 3 days after the election. That's where at least the problem I'm aware of was. It violates equal protection as everyone voting in person was limited to having their votes in on election day.

equal protection requires that everyone be treated equally. by allowing the mail in votes to be treated differently they violated the equal protections of the constitution

Are you suggesting that a person does not deserve legal representation if someone doesn't agree with their case?

because, that would seem to violate due process

I think you're right... so basically the PA court potentially disenfranchised all the mail in voters in PA that meet those criteria.

I'm pretty sure we're talking about the same issue. The case was originally taken to SCOTUS before the election but because ACB hadn't been seated yet there was a 4-4 tie and it went back to the state. Alito then told PA to segregate the votes that came in after the deadline so that the case could be reheard after the election.

You're missing the problem. The problem is having that amount of time allowed the cheating to occur. They had 3 days to manufacture votes which appears to be what happened.

The law firm was threatened both personally and professionally. The threats were significant and credible enough that they felt it was in their best interest to not represent the president. is this appropriate and can you see how it could leave the president without council if all lawyers were as gutless?

That's exactly what I've been saying but the courts won't hear the case... see the problem?

Ah, so now it's ok for the courts to deny due process.

Not sure where you're getting that number. As I recall it was 268k

I would say if the threats rise to the degree that it deprives a person of council that's beyond legitimate

had to go look it up. Presidents legal team is challenging 700k votes in PA that were counted while poll watchers weren't permitted to watch. So, the mail in vote issue was different.

Right. It's referencing the 14th amendment where you find the equal protections clause

You realize they were unable to find any crimes after two years of investigation despite all the investigators being democrats.

OMG. So glad you brought up Flynn. Everyone involved with his prosecution should be hanged. The man did nothing wrong and was extorted into pleading guilty or else they would go after his son. Flynn is practically a Saint.

He didn't