Good

you got me.

So tomorrow will you continue to think that fraud evidence was not looked at by the courts @rip.lul

because they explained "standing" on this show

Or that the evidence of fraud was not looked at by the courts

I will still not have seen total due process.

@chuchomucho standing had to do with the Texas case which was about state procedures not fraud

@rip.lul ok name one where due process was not granted

That is fruad

No it isn’t @chuchomucho

That not voter or election fraud @chuchomucho

i HAVENT SEEEN IT

they changed the rules illegally

THERE IS NOTHING TO NAME

Same principle apples. Which court case did not give the plaintiff due process @rip.lul the positive claims being “courts did not give due process”

Maybe you could provide an instance of this and not some Op-ed saying no evidence,

I am only going by the court cases

can you provide me some?

and not an op-ed article.

Of the court cases which one did not give the plaintiff due process: I’m not doing your homework. You made the positive claims now support it @rip.lul

they changed the rules illegally, they did not go through the correct process of changing them

That is fruad

My claim; I have not seen nonpartisan due process. Its potentially out there. I just havent seen it.

@james j You could also just say 'no evidence'. That's how making claims works, as is my understanding.

No fraud. No evidence. Next.

@chuchomucho that isn’t fraud. That’s a state issue they argued in court and the Supreme Court of that court said it was permissible. That is the end of the line. Rule changes is not fraud and if the republicans really cared or thought it was bad they would have challenged it before the election in court. They did not do this. They only did this after they lost. Again this is not a fraud case showing any fraud occurred

I'll post it on Parler so I can use it as a source.

Heh Parler

no, its just a violation of the constituion.

And a Tweet too.

@rip.lul due process is the plantiff and the defendant getting their day in court. Everyone got their day in court and the courts ruled via the constitution. Provide a counter example if you have it

I dont. You seem to be informed on the situation. Thats why I am asking.

No it’s isn’t the state Supreme Court decided how to interpret the constitution of their state @rip.lul not Texas. Again not fraud

https://tenor.com/view/let-it-go-elsa-disney-disney-princess-queen-gif-3597315

You made the positive claim due process did not happen. Why are you claiming this without any proof @rip.lul

the positive claim? lol I said I havent seen total due process. That doesnt mean its not out there.

instead of providing sources on your positive claim you tell me to ' do homework'

So, this is what happened, the changed the rules last minute illegally because they did not go through the legislator. Then some people where fed misinformation to diminish the validity of the actual fraud, to make us argue over this crap. I heard over 12 hours of testimony that I would say requires a more transparent look into this. You can say it wasn’t fraud but it led to a large opportunity of fraud, that probably did happen. I don’t think they will ever admit to it as they will get sued, they are just going to sweep everything under the rug.

this is exactly what happened.

@rip.lul again show where the constitution was violated and the Trump team did not get due process. This is your claim to support

So, this is what happened, the changed the rules last minute illegally because they did not go through the legislator. Then some people where fed misinformation to diminish the validity of the actual fraud, to make us argue over this crap. I heard over 12 hours of testimony that I would say requires a more transparent look into this. You can say it wasn’t fraud but it led to a large opportunity of fraud, that probably did happen. I don’t think they will ever admit to it as they will get sued, they are just going to sweep everything under the rug.