Not even the most absurd lawsuits claimed China owns dominion. It's just some crap websites told people to believe

Every election they must disclose their ownership to state and federal governments including those lead by the GOP which would have clearly shown if they were bought out by a foreign country or anybody

😂 you see what you want. Its ok

This is just plain common sense stuff

Which is again why it's not even in Guiliani or Powells lawsuits which are full of crazy shit they cant prove. You are beyond Powell levels of just believe random internet rumors 🍿

Your arguements are moot. According to article 27 code 213 sections 44-99 of the b s sensing criminal code... you're in violation of it all.

I dont see what I want I find facts whether I like them or not. I dont need to be coddled with a warm OAN blanket like a baby

You're for socialism. Communism and the whole shebang. Or you would have answered any of my questions above.

But you don't care about truth

You only want your guy to win. By any means necessary.

I loathe socialism and communism. What you changed the definition of socialism to not believing lies and requesting evidence of widespread voter fraud 😂

Im requesting evidence!! All i want is for the courts to hear the evidence! For both sides to present their cases for and against!!!!! That's all i want! There courts are apparently to scared to see evidence bc it was presented too late.

The courts and Democrats are not responsible for giving you a valid case because your feels

That's NOT OK! i don't care what latches says. If there is evidence provable in court that 10 million votes were stolen. Let's see it!!!!

Facts dont care about your feelings

Facts arent being seen!!!!!!!!!!

Also both sides did present their case in court. One guess whose side didnt hold up to any scrutiny

If they can be so easily dis proven... then lets play ball

Prove them to be so insanely ridiculous and im ok with that

The courts these take place in are heavily biased....towards Trump

But to shush them like they aren't worthy of being heard? Debated? You're not confident in your case. Period. Truth is supressed

I don't mind, though I appreciate your understanding. I'm not an expert, but I am someone that tries to stay informed. I think it is important to keep the dialog going. I hear folks on this server coming into the conversation every day being heavily partisan based on what they have been exposed to in their respective media echo chambers. I think it is why our country is so divided right now. We have forgotten that empathy is an essential component to understanding. Few people take the time to look at problems/circumstances from the opposite perspective. Understanding how a problem is viewed from each vantage point will go a long way to bringing us back to a place where reasonable people can disagree and still be respectful to each other.

They aren't hearing evidence.

They were heard and debated you had no case lol

No matter how far the lawsuits get to theres nothing

What possible control do you think dems have over Trump appointed far right judges to begin with 😂

I couldn't agree more. Im ok with being challenged. Im just not ok with the constant mockery. I don't mean to be rude or dismissive of others opinions. But i think we carn challenged eachother in postive ways. I apologize if ive been offensive.

These judges want to do Trump a solid for promoting them they just need something anything to latch onto to even pretend theres a case to be heard

No one wants to touch this. I pray for our future someone has the courage to combat it... or communism may be quickly approaching. I know you haven't been sensored.... bc you're on the side of sensors.. but take a look at your fellow Americans and you'll see the thing you abhor taking root in your homestead.

But its not challenging your ideals, so carry on.

I know what communism is. That nonsense anything I dont like is communism nonsense is lost on me 😂

Did you hear the last broadcast??? Can't say the "f" word

I mean really that people bought that whole moderate=liberal=progressive=communism=socialism=fascism nonsense. Words have meanings

"I'll tone it down" to make sure not to break the rules

A boring old white moderate corporate democrat isnt rocking any boats

I understand why but seriously!!? That he has to do this so that people can hear hisi opinion is infuriating!

Thank you for your agreement. It's a tough time. You obviously hold strong-held beliefs, which is good. With regard to the current state of things, I have tried to see it from both sides and try to understand it from both perspectives.I am glad you are open to new ideas - as am I.

Hey! I love all people. Even socialist communist Democrats that want to silence truth and silence me. If i walked a mile in your shoes i may be on the opposite end of this argument. Just know we're not all gullible idiot's who are full of hate. We just want the truth and the actual winner to prevail. No matter who that is. 🙏❤

Thanks for answering.
I appreciate that it might be irksome that what began as a private comment has become a public conversation.
I do have questions and comments though and would appreciate further elucidation.
First, the matters that I know little about, and I do appreciate your time. Is State Supreme Court the proper place to raise matters of federal constitutionality? If the Act 77 suites had achieved redress then there would have been no point raising the point of constitutionality which at SCOTUS 4-4 cannot really be said to have been settled. Essentially that decision seems to say, “Sort it out amongst yourselves – and if you can’t, get back to us.” Or does it not?
You made the point about the state having made a distinction between absentee and mail-in ballots, but the pertinent distinction is not the technical standing of each category but what effective measures were in place to verify the authenticity of the ballots received of both kinds - or have I misunderstood.

@English Remi, you just advanced to level 1!

To say that Pennsylvania officially verifies signatures is misdirection, I think. The question is whether and how well they apply their own rules – if the measure is that one letter should be the same, or as has been alleged elsewhere, that the machine that verified signatures was set at a level which makes no discernment between one squiggle and another, there is no point in such poor verification.
For example, was there verification of the boxes that were taken out from under the tables in the dead of night after observers were sent home, according to contemporary news reports and witnesses – if those ballots were verified elsewhere, then that part of the process needs to have been observed. The claim is that if this happened it occurred without observation, and while processes were applied to frustrate observation.
To say that signatures are never verified in recounts is also misdirection. What is necessary is a verification that the papers were sent by the people they were purported to have been sent by. This was no longer possible. However other details in a hand recount are possible and are being denied by the show process of running stacks of paper through a machine who's ability to count is not in dispute.
I am new to this forum and unfamiliar with how to navigate it. If you have discussed these in detail I would you please tell me where I can view the conversation.