@AdvanceManExtraordinaire again they presented almost no fraud cases. The evidence they did provide was such trash they got laughed out of court. All these claims that were at the hearing were either unverifiable claims or have been debunked. There is no case. The courts did not get these rulings wrong. “Let the courts decided”- Giuliani . There is a reason they didn’t pursue the evidence route of fraud. It’s because the did not have any.

And I think we need someone to do that again, in various places across the country

I simply disagree that that was the case. I don’t believe they had a fair hearing in these states and the judges were under great duress, and felt they had no standing to overturn an entire election despite the facts presented.

It simply means the judges are out for themselves.

Post less and read more statutes.

@Kaptain Tailhook, you just advanced to level 3!

I think Trump lawyers and witnesses had suspicions of fraud based on publicly available data - they wanted to gather more data during discovery but cases were thrown out. No idea if they have a right to do that - I can see it might look like fishing.

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire then present a specific court case

@Beth he did with a strong crime apprehension policy.. but now if the government is to strong in crime base places they get accused of abuse of power

They said there was mountains of evidence but they couldn’t show anyone the evidence until court. Then in court there was nothing. They said they couldn’t present their evidence in court and then again refused to show evidence. They trotted some fake shit that couldn’t hold up in court before some state congresses. Still waiting for that evidence of “obvious fraud”. 😂

standing when used in these cases were not used on fraud cases @AdvanceManExtraordinaire Texas and Pennsylvania were not fraud cases

In Pennsylvania, the court system had the duty to enforce the rules and throw out votes that were not cast and counted according to the procedures set forth by their constitution. They simply failed to do so and did not throw out these votes.

If it can fool me it can fool a judge just isn’t a legal basis for proving fraud

That is true. We just need some consistency. Everything is so politicised. It’s not good for anyone

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire penn was not a fraud case

Supposing there was fraud in a state election, and supposing all voters in that state are fine with it - does the federal gov have a right to contest it?

@Beth everything is in video and social media is streaming live the news .

Why would all the voters in a state be fine with fraud

No they don’t. However in this case the voters were not fine with it.

Also rule changes were made in Texas and nc, the Trump team for some reason didn’t go after them @AdvanceManExtraordinaire

thanks, just curious 🙂

I don’t think that’s a thing 😂 are the all the same party or something

@AdvanceManExtraordinaire he lost by the same machines he won in 2016.

I don’t think they should be faulted for that. Why should they sue in states they won when their goal is to pursue the legitimate outcome of the election?

Just saying everything I don’t like is fraud without evidence isn’t a thing that will garner credibility

Yep, the fact that he won in 2016 does seem to invalidate a lot of the conspiracy theories (other than the massive mail in voting and alleged lack of accurate signature verification)

The allegation is that the voting machines can be programmed to do whatever you want, or give access to third parties to do whatever they want. Not that their programmed to make people named trump lose.

What happened to every illegal vote and every legal vote counted. @AdvanceManExtraordinaire again penn was not a fraud case. That was a constitutional technicality case.

I’d like to hear the logic behind the theory that Hillary Clinton is so clean she would have never cheated

@james j agreed

@Friedrich, you just advanced to level 3!

Hillary is a piece of work. Worst of the worst when it comes to dirty politics

I realize that that was the case, and the illegal votes should’ve been thrown out. On top of that it’s obvious that fraud occurred there based on witness testimony and data analysis.

For people saying that no fraud occurred-if given the same facts, and the court ruled that fraud DID occur, would you change your view that fraud occurred?

Again fraud enough to over turn the election. We have not seen any evidence of this @AdvanceManExtraordinaire

No one ever said elections were perfect @AdvanceManExtraordinaire

I guess there was a lack of trust on the part of republican poll watchers - but probably no violations of state law there

Witness testimony and data analysis doesn’t prove definitive fraud. Especially from crazy partisans. You have to go the extra step and prove the fraud alleged.

There was lack in trust in the election ever since Trump declared the elections would be fraudulent. He primed his base to believe it. So now everything looks like fraud to them @Friedrich

having Abrams and her sister involved in all this doesn't help either. Republicans are saying Abrams was actually in charge of anything related to voting in GA 😆

Yeah that was something to be addressed kinda