Arizona Election Audit

[LouderVol]

I've already stated that fraud was wide spread. I just don't understand why those that think the election was fair wouldn't want it proven to all of us poor stupid sceptics. What are you guys afraid of?

Innocent until proven guilty. So far multiple recounts, audits, and court cases had turned up nada, zip, zilch, zero, nil. We have never had a major recount or audit without some type of smoking gun. At this point we dont even know if anyone has been shot.

You are using the same Maxine Water's level argument that you must investigate Trump to find what he did wrong. I mean, what are you afraid of?

It was dumb then, its dumb now.

 

[McDad]

Innocent until proven guilty. So far multiple recounts, audits, and court cases had turned up nada, zip, zilch, zero, nil. We have never had a major recount or audit without some type of smoking gun. At this point we dont even know if anyone has been shot.

You are using the same Maxine Water's level argument that you must investigate Trump to find what he did wrong. I mean, what are you afraid of?

It was dumb then, its dumb now.

Consistency. Nice job.

 

[tnmarktx]

Innocent until proven guilty. So far multiple recounts, audits, and court cases had turned up nada, zip, zilch, zero, nil. We have never had a major recount or audit without some type of smoking gun. At this point we dont even know if anyone has been shot.

You are using the same Maxine Water's level argument that you must investigate Trump to find what he did wrong. I mean, what are you afraid of?

It was dumb then, its dumb now.

Most of all of this post is a lie. Cases were not heard at all. You're one of the hopeless cases I see.

 

[LouderVol]

Most of all of this post is a lie. Cases were not heard at all. You're one of the hopeless cases I see.

Yeah they got tossed due to lack of evidence. Kinda important to our justice system. If you have a problem with it take it up with our Consitution.

 

[LouderVol]

Consistency. Nice job.

?

 

[tnmarktx]

Yeah they got tossed due to lack of evidence. Kinda important to our justice system. If you have a problem with it take it up with our Consitution.

Another bullsh!t lie. I suppose you see a difference in the great majority of Republicans and Democrats in DC. Tell me specifically where cases where evidence was allowed oh great constitutional scholar...

 

[LouderVol]

Another bullsh!t lie. I suppose you see a difference in The great majority of Republicans and Democrats in DC. Tell me specifically where cases where evidence was allowed oh great constitutional scholar...

Uh, that's what I said. The courts tossed them because of a lack of actual evidence that would hold up in court. I am sorry but tweets of redacted charts made on reddit doesnt count as "evidence" in real courts.

And again in this country we dont prove innocence. We prove guilt. It's up to you to PROVE in court with actual EVIDENCE that a wrong was done. Your feels dont count.

 

[Septic]

I made a statement that IF democrats had accomplished this they would consider it a keystone or signature accomplishment. Do you not believe that to be true?

I don't know, and neither do you - that's quite literally the point. You certainly don't know enough to come to said conclusion and declare them all to be hypocrites. It's silly to stomp your feet over an argument you're making up as you go along.

Not sure why you keep wanting to litigate something that isn't open to subjectivity.

Your personal shots at me are noted.

 

[tnmarktx]

Uh, that's what I said. The courts tossed them because of a lack of actual evidence that would hold up in court. I am sorry but tweets of redacted charts made on reddit doesnt count as "evidence" in real courts.

And again in this country we dont prove innocence. We prove guilt. It's up to you to PROVE in court with actual EVIDENCE that a wrong was done. Your feels dont count.

How dumb can you be. You understand the difference between not hearing the case at all and having evidence? Apparently you don't know the difference.

 

[Septic]

?

I believe he was pointing out your response was fair and non-partisan.

It was a solid post.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Another bullsh!t lie. I suppose you see a difference in the great majority of Republicans and Democrats in DC. Tell me specifically where cases where evidence was allowed oh great constitutional scholar...

In the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Pennsylvania, under Judge Stephanos Bibas, and Bibas was a Trump appointed judge. Judge Bibas specifically said that he dismissed a case on its failed merits... and that was after he had said that he would allow new evidence to be brought forth and new witnesses to be called.

Google "In Harsh Rebuke, Appeals Court Rejects Trump's Election Challenge in Pennsylvania - November 27, 2020 NY Times"

You are slow as molasses, dude.

 

[tnmarktx]

In the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, under Judge Stephanos Bibas, and Bibas was a Trump appointed judge. He specifically said that he dismissed a case on its failed merits... and that was after he had said that he would allow new evidence to be brought forth and new witnesses to be called.

Google "In Harsh Rebuke, Appeals Court Rejects Trump's Election Challenge - November 27, 2020 NY Times"

I knew some moron would post this. You win. They filed the case on the grounds of violation of equal protection, not election fraud. The ignorant judge tried to make the case about something that wasn't even filed. An abuse of power if you ask me. Congratulations, you get the dunce award.

 

[BowlBrother85]

I knew some moron would post this. You win. They filed the case on the grounds of violation of equal protection, not election fraud. The ignorant judge tried to make the case about something that wasn't even filed. An abuse of power if you ask me. Congratulations, you get the dunce award.

That is because the Trump legal team would never allege fraud in court. They would only allege fraud while they were on a cable news show. Bibas was allowing new evidence to be presented and new witnesses to be called... and the Trump team had nothing.

Judge Bibas dismissed the case on its failed merits, not for a lack of standing.

 

[tnmarktx]

You are a stupid person. That is because the Trump legal team would never allege fraud in court. They would only allege fraud while they were on a cable news show. Bibas was allowing new evidence to be presented and new witnesses to be called, short bus... and the Trump team had nothing.

Judge Bibas dismissed the case on its failed merits, not for a lack of standing.

Read the case again. You've posted this argument many times before. One would've thought you'd realize how ignorant it is and stop posting it. Yet you continue to double down with it. After all this, I'm the stupid one. SMH.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Read the case again. You've posted this argument many times before. One would've thought you'd realize how ignorant it is and stop posting it. Yet you continue to double down with it. After all this, I'm the stupid one. SMH.

Nm.

 

[tnmarktx]

I've read the case several times... and you are damn right about being the stupid one.

Read it many times and still can't realize it makes you look stupid. Sad.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Read it many times and still can't realize it makes you look stupid. Sad.

You asked for a case where new evidence was being allowed. And that was from a Trump-appointed judge. You then move the goal posts... to only include a rejection of voter fraud, but the Trump team never alleged voter fraud in court. They would only allege voter fraud on Fox News.

 

[tnmarktx]

You asked for a case where new evidence was being allowed... and then cry like a baby when one is cited. And that was from a Trump-appointed judge. You then move the goal posts... to only include a rejection of voter fraud, but the Trump team never alleged voter fraud in court. They would only allege voter fraud on Fox News. You are thicker than oat meal.

What was there case filled for numbnuts? You've read it so many times, what was it filled for?

 

[BowlBrother85]

What was there case filled for numbnuts? You've read it so many times, what was it filled for?

"The campaign never alleges that any ballot was fraudulent or cast by an illegal voter. It never alleges that any defendant treated the Trump campaign or its votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or its votes. Calling something discrimination does not make it so. The second amended complaint still suffers from these core defects, so granting leave to amend would have been futile." - Judge Stephanos Bibas

Bibas clearly states that the Trump campaign wasn't alleging voter fraud. He rejected the case on its lack of merit. He gave the Trump legal team a chance to present new evidence, but they had none. The Trump team was very careful to not allege fraud in court... where there could be repercussions for their law licenses for lying... as they frequently did on Fox News.

 

[tnmarktx]

"The campaign never alleges that any ballot was fraudulent or cast by an illegal voter. It never alleges that any defendant treated the Trump campaign or its votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or its votes. Calling something discrimination does not make it so. The second amended complaint still suffers from these core defects, so granting leave to amend would have been futile." - Judge Stephanos Bibas

There you go, short bus. Bibas clearly states that the Trump campaign wasn't alleging voter fraud. He rejected the case on its lack of merit. He gave the Trump legal team a chance to present new evidence, but they had none. The Trump team was very careful to not allege fraud in court... where there could be repercussions for their law licenses for lying... as they frequently did on Fox News.

... and I would get a better handle on grammar before talking about someone else's perceived lack of intelligence. You write like a special needs child.

Your as full of sh!t as this article. Don't quote a bullsh!t article, quote the actual case text.

 

[tnmarktx]

"The campaign never alleges that any ballot was fraudulent or cast by an illegal voter. It never alleges that any defendant treated the Trump campaign or its votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or its votes. Calling something discrimination does not make it so. The second amended complaint still suffers from these core defects, so granting leave to amend would have been futile." - Judge Stephanos Bibas

There you go, short bus. Bibas clearly states that the Trump campaign wasn't alleging voter fraud. He rejected the case on its lack of merit. He gave the Trump legal team a chance to present new evidence, but they had none. The Trump team was very careful to not allege fraud in court... where there could be repercussions for their law licenses for lying... as they frequently did on Fox News.

... and I would get a better handle on grammar before talking about someone else's perceived lack of intelligence. You write like a special needs child.

Here it is you ignorant mother fuker. Now really read it. Download and keep it so you can stop using this stupid argument, or at least formulate a good argument from it.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

The border has been a mess for decades. There's a reason Trump wanted to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it. It wasn't because things were going swimmingly.

The much better option is just to sit on your hands, do nothing and talk about doing something.

You know the liberal approach.

 

[LouderVol]

I believe he was pointing out your response was fair and non-partisan.

It was a solid post.

i just expect more from my boo than that.

 

[VolnJC]

Where would I go to find a thread about the AZ election audit?

 

[BowlBrother85]

Here it is you ignorant mother fuker. Now really read it. Download and keep it so you can stop using this stupid argument, or at least formulate a good argument from it.

The Trump legal team never argued that fraud had occurred, except on Fox News. When they were given the opportunity to call witnesses and provide new evidence before Judge Bibas, they couldn't do it... and that is what you initially asked for.