Stop the CBT.

Lol

That's not true... Matt Braynard did a widely publicized data analysis with list that he purchased using money he raised in an effort to produce a list of potential fraudulent voters. He provided a copy of his results to the FBI and, most likely, the Trump campaign. They could use that list and track down each of the voters and/or determine who voted for them. There are a number of things that can be done. They don't need access to the machines in order to track most of this stuff down. Otherwise, how can they assert anything even close to fraud???

Damn I learned something that I didn't want to learn.

Reminds me of the conversation with Doc. lol

That's what those trapeze people do...

The ones that swing from appendages that would seem uncomfortable.

Omg

Uncomfortable definitely not a strong enough word.

Are we talking signatures on Pennsylvania ballots? Cuz that's the only thing I'm talking about

@TaLoN132 it's fixing to write an algorithm to show you that this is not the case.

In my opinion the only defects that are apparent is in the signature check

Actually, his analysis was about PA mail-in ballots. He attempted to identify people that were not frequent voters or had appeared to have moved, but still voted in their old precinct, and a bunch of other categories. This would overlap with probable invalid signatures.

His being Braynard's....

This is all rather beside the point it doesn't matter. The electoral college already cast as votes. I'm just saying that the legislature shouldn't pass a law only to have the judiciary completely rewrite it

You can always cherry pick some data to prove a point that the people who pay the bills want you to prove. That's a damn fact.

'Expert testimony'

You can always pay people to say whatever you want.

That's another damn fact.

Well I'm not talking data. The Pennsylvania supreme Court literally changed the deadline for mail and ballots, and they also prohibited spoilage from signatur e mismatch

If that's not garbage I don't know what is

The legal aspect of this is where there's issues. But one would have to win court cases.

Then it will be litigated! As it should be. Don't know how this makes the whole system not work, or that we need to overturn the results.

Undoubtedly. Still garbage

ain't been too much winning

I mean, I agree, the separation of powers is of tantamount importance.

Then there's one state doesn't get Trump the presidency.

He would need three Pennsylvania Georgia and Nevada

Or Pennsylvania Georgia and some other state.

Sure. That's why a state supreme court should not be more powerful than a state's legislature

Separate but equal

Equal, last I recall.

Then how come it was able to rewrite legislation

In Pennsylvania at least

Because of prior existing legislation that contradicted it.

Legal decisions aren't legislation.

You're telling me that the court can literally change a date that the legislature set and that's proper

And that prior existing legislation had superiority.

That's not what happened... Secretary of the Commonwealth Boockvar was granted oversight of the election by the legislature. Part of that mandate is to ensure safe and fair elections. The GOP legislature didn't like the temporary changes that she made in order to address concerns about the pandemic and sued her. So, there were 2 competing directives that was part of the PA voting laws as prescribed by the PA legislature. The PA GOP decided to pursue a legal case instead of amending to PA laws. The PA SC sided with the SotC in allowing her to make the temporary changes. The PA GOP again decided to pursue the legal case instead of passing a law to block her and appealed to the US SC, who decided to let the PA SC decision stand in a 4-4 decision BEFORE the election. This was all legal.

Now do I agree with the court doing that? No, not really.

That's what courts do.