@andrasol It's observation. Honesty has nothing to do with it.

I think it's hard for them to use Act 77 as proof that the Sec of State did not have the authority to extend the time allotted for receiving ballots postmarked by 11/3 in once case and then argue in another case before the SC that Act 77 is unconstitutional. The first suit proves that they went into the election believing that Act 77 was legal. They only decided it was unconstitutional when their guy lost. I can't see Alito hanging his legacy on that...

That act 77 nonsense is why folks dont trust GOP acting in good faith why would folks want then to have things heard in court. Dirty dirty

so you guys think that republicans are the only ones doing dirty politics in this election?

Yesterdays viva and barnes cast goes deeper into the act 77 cases (seperate cases).

Diff claims so it wont matter i think.

LOL how ignorant

> Are you guys listening to the hearing?
@robxtom Not anymore. It was an unrestricted press conference dressed up to look like something official. Useless, unless you are already buying what they are peddling in the first place.

Oh yeah completely throwing out all votes in a state throwing out all mailin votes not certifying black communities the dirtiest

Hell no... just show us the signatures... if its fine... why not?

That just won #dumbdumb of the day

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=H&SPick=20190&cosponId=32628

We designed a system you cant check signatures then demand to see the signatures checkmate

Be civil with one another in here.

no maw, dedkraken just accused everyone of racism who questions the election

They changed the checks to be non existant... come stay honest

To be fair, the Dems have mostly stayed out of the fray. Biden's team has not filed one suit to force the certification of the election or interfere with things playing out in court.

he should be shamed out of this server for that

They tried to discard detroit it's a statement of fact

... what?

They are filling a lot to dismiss the cases reps. Bring to court

How on earth did you end up at that conclusion to what he said?

its ok for him to make a blanket statement that we are motivated by racism but its not ok for us to call him an idiot for it?

Nope, read rhe cases. Not the headlines

Exactly. You can disagree in a civil way.

If you think that's racist that's on you if you think it's a cold political tactic that's on you its dirty is all I'm saying

The Biden team??? I know that those being sued are, but that's not the Biden team.

Meant dems in general. Dont know if biden team specif.

then why did you even bring up race?

@Maw Mom I hope it wasn't me

They targeted an 80% black community and let through a 95% white community why did they do that

LOL stfu man

not an argument

stfu is also not an argument.

Let’s be respectful. 😊

@busillis You're fine. xD

No, they went after very large bucket of vote vs a tiny bucket of votes.

How bout... we check them all? :-o

no, i will not respect anyone who accuses me of racism because I question the voting procedures of a city

They didnt want to check them all the Republicans in the board said let's only check this one community everyone else is fine

@Dedkraken, you just advanced to level 9!

> @Zuluzeit What about that one SC NY judge that tried to threaten police?
@Maw ¿que? No idea what that is.

It's a significant overreach to assume that because he brought up a party that excluded a race as implying everyone here that isn't in concurrence with him is somehow racist.