PENNSYLVANIA, ARIZONA, MICHIGAN LEGISLATURES TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON 2020 ELECTION

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
The evidence is being presented to the legislatures which are far better equipped to appreciate the nature and significance of the evidence, every member of which, has personally participated in elections.
No, the evidence is not being presented to the legislatures and even if it was it would be completely useless. Courts are the place for presentation of evidence (as we've seen Trumpites repeatedly try to do and fail). They're now trying to convince small sympathetic parts of some few legislatures (note: not legislatures as a whole) because they know that legislators are neither skilled nor qualified in judging evidence the way judges are.
Further courts are optimized for procedural justice not time.
Yet plenty of courts have acted in plenty of time on over 40 of these complaints. Virtually all went against Trump, which is why (of course) they are now trying another, lower, bar.
Legislatures by contrast can act with dispatch.
You must be joking. When have they ever done so?

Furthermore, courts are ill equipped to expunge their own political bias, whereas legislatures will answer again to the people in the next election cycle.
That must the most ridiculous thing anybody has ever posted. You honestly think that members of legislatures - who openly represent political parties - are more likely to "expunge their own political bias" than judges? Seriously?

And finally and most importantly the Constitution, places this responsibility of selecting the elector in the hands of the legislators.
And the legislators have exercised that responsibility and chosen the electors.
So in Pennsylvanian for example, the legislature can observe that the executive officers violated all the election laws they were obliged to follow, and by reason of that violation they can reclaim their constitutional authority forthwith.
No, they can't see that. Some Republicans imagine/pretend they can see that as an excuse to trying to subvert the will of the people.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
No, the evidence is not being presented to the legislatures
We are communicating across the world wide web. You have no excuse for not knowing the definition of evidence.
and even if it was it would be completely useless.
That remains to be seen.
Courts are the place for presentation of evidence
Very often. So are legislatures.
(as we've seen Trumpites repeatedly try to do and fail).
. . . a little patience; the Trump haters tried and failed for four years.
They're now trying to convince small sympathetic parts of some few legislatures (note: not legislatures as a whole) because they know that legislators are neither skilled nor qualified in judging evidence the way judges are.
Mention that to the founding fathers the next time you see them.
Yet plenty of courts have acted in plenty of time on over 40 of these complaints. Virtually all went against Trump, which is why (of course) they are now trying another, lower, bar.
Those mostly failed on standing, which is a nonsense excuse.
You must be joking. When have they ever done so?
1824.
That must the most ridiculous thing anybody has ever posted.
You need to get out more.
You honestly think that members of legislatures - who openly represent political parties - are more likely to "expunge their own political bias" than judges? Seriously?
They are politically accountable, where judges are not.
And the legislators have exercised that responsibility and chosen the electors.
That theory presupposes the election laws they passed were followed, which they were not. If you don't follow the laws the legislature prescribed they can simply see to it themselves.
No, they can't see that.

Yes, they can.
Some Republicans imagine/pretend they can see that as an excuse to trying to subvert the will of the people.
The people elected the legislature to carry out their Constitutional duties.
 

vibise

Well-known member
Go to Project Veritas and they will be releasing something more than comparable, in fact egregious, every day for several weeks.

Providing them an opportunity to vote every place they lived for the last 15 years, and help friends and relatives who may have mobility issue related to cardiac arrest.

Demonstrating the virtue of seeing that the voter doesn't suffer from cardiac arrest.

There is nothing artificial about showing up at the polls on election day and casting a ballot. In fact, Anthony Fauci said that is what everybody should do.

And apparently is makes sense to expel all the election observers on false pretenses while you count hundreds of thousands of ballots in the wee hours of the morning, under cover of darkness, and announce the next morning that Joe Biden is even or ahead. Provided you are not burdened with scruples, I can see exactly why that would make sense.

Exactly! And Bill Clinton never had sex with that woman! At least until things blew over, and then he decided that maybe he did. We haven't gotten to that stage yet. The part where everyone concedes that the election was crookeder than a dogs hind leg.

You think that might have something to do with the fact that David Frum and the other idiots in the Orange Man Bad camp war-gamed the exact architecture of their cheating blueprint and published it in the Atlantic on July 31 of this year? One thing is for sure; they certainly followed their blueprint. I'm thinking Trumps comment was related to that, what do you think?
Project Veritas is the O'Keefe run organization known for using doctored videos to make points they can't support honestly. From wikipedia:

Project Veritas is an American far-right[14] activist group founded by James O'Keefe in 2010.[19] The group uses undercover techniques to reveal supposed liberal bias and corruption[15] and is known for producing deceptively edited videos about media organizations, left-leaning groups,[27] and debunked conspiracy theories.[31]

I did not say that it is somehow artificial to show up to vote in person. I said that counting those heavily Republican votes first would artificially skew the results. Trump does not vote in person.

As for the rest of your claims of fraud, none of them have convinced any courts, or even AG Barr.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
We are communicating across the world wide web. You have no excuse for not knowing the definition of evidence.

That remains to be seen.

Very often. So are legislatures.

. . . a little patience; the Trump haters tried and failed for four years.

Mention that to the founding fathers the next time you see them.

Those mostly failed on standing, which is a nonsense excuse.

1824.

You need to get out more.

They are politically accountable, where judges are not.

That theory presupposes the election laws they passed were followed, which they were not. If you don't follow the laws the legislature prescribed they can simply see to it themselves.


Yes, they can.

The people elected the legislature to carry out their Constitutional duties.
The same nonsense that's been spouted since the election.

The courts. That's where the evidence needs to be presented. It's failed.

You may hope that the legislatures might be convinced by a few to overturn the will of the people. It may even happen. It would be the end of democracy in the US.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
The same nonsense that's been spouted since the election.
The nonsense is four years of Trump Russia collusion, and refusal to abide by the 2016 election, and this years attempt to hijack the 2020 election.
The courts. That's where the evidence needs to be presented.
That brings to mind an interesting question. What would happen if the offensive coordinators could call the plays for the opposing team?
It's failed.
Then you got what you wanted for Christmas and there is nothing to discuss.
You may hope that the legislatures might be convinced by a few to overturn the will of the people.
The will of the people was to install those legislators so they would do their constitutional duty.
It may even happen. It would be the end of democracy in the US.
That didn't prove out in prior instances. But being from the left, in your world, history started yesterday, so you wouldn't know about that.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
The nonsense is four years of Trump Russia collusion, and refusal to abide by the 2016 election, and this years attempt to hijack the 2020 election.
There was no refusal to abide by the 2016 election; there was no attempt to hijack the 2020 election (aside from the one Trumpites are now engaged in).
The will of the people was to install those legislators so they would do their constitutional duty.
The will of the people has been shown - they want Biden for President by a margin of about seven million.
That didn't prove out in prior instances. But being from the left, in your world, history started yesterday, so you wouldn't know about that.
There have been no prior instances of a sitting president stealing an election.

I'm not interested in your childish ad hominems and insults.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
There was no refusal to abide by the 2016 election;
Three years of a special counsel that investigated what he knew was not a crime on day one, seamlessly rolling into an impeachment on a totally preposterous pretext? I'm sorry but 100% of the evidence is on the side of my assertion, and 0% is on the side of your denial.
there was no attempt to hijack the 2020 election (aside from the one Trumpites are now engaged in).
Dead voters, manufactured ballots, running Biden ballots multiple times, stealing identities of people in the hundreds of thousands robbing them of their ability to vote on their own behalf, because their ballots were stolen. Physically beating up witnesses putting them in the hospitable. That is more than attempt to hijack the election, it's an act of war against the United States.
The will of the people has been shown - they want Biden for President by a margin of about seven million.
No they didn't.
There have been no prior instances of a sitting president stealing an election.
Your proclamation on the matter doesn't make it so.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Three years of a special counsel that investigated what he knew was not a crime on day one,
No such thing happened.
seamlessly rolling into an impeachment on a totally preposterous pretext?
There was no such impeachment.
I'm sorry but 100% of the evidence is on the side of my assertion, and 0% is on the side of your denial.
You've provided zero evidence.
Dead voters, manufactured ballots, running Biden ballots multiple times, stealing identities of people in the hundreds of thousands robbing them of their ability to vote on their own behalf, because their ballots were stolen.
All of these have been repeatedly debunked.

Physically beating up witnesses putting them in the hospitable.
Provide support for this claim.
That is more than attempt to hijack the election, it's an act of war against the United States.
If they had happened, they would be. As it is, they did not happen, and the act of war against the United States is what Trump is doing.

I don't blame people like you too much. You've shown for four years that you're willing to accept any garbage he throws your way. It's the politicians - the ones who know better but who are happy to bow down and kiss Trump's behind just to keep in power - who are the loathsome ones.
No they didn't.
Yes, they did.
Your proclamation on the matter doesn't make it so.
The facts make it so.

Does it not make you wonder that nobody - nobody - except Trumpites thinks there was fraud? Every agency, every authority, US, Republican, Democrat, international which has investigated found no fraud and, in fact, found the election to be the most secure in decades. Do you not wonder why some agency, some judge, some group somewhere that isn't tied to Trump hasn't found any of this evidence? Does it not ever occur to you that the only people throwing out this evidence are Trumpites?
 

Thistle

Well-known member
No such thing happened.

There was no such impeachment.
There you go, deny the existence of the times in which you live. That sounds like a winner.
You've provided zero evidence.
My memory doesn't reset to zero every morning when I punch the alarm clock so I do carry a residual memory of the times in which I live.
All of these have been repeatedly debunked.
You literally have zero knowledge of the times in which you live. You could not possibly make that statement otherwise.
Provide support for this claim.
Giuliani mentioned this in the hearings in Michigan.
If they had happened, they would be. As it is, they did not happen, and the act of war against the United States is what Trump is doing. I don't blame people like you too much. You've shown for four years that you're willing to accept any garbage he throws your way.
We are literally separated by facts. We can't agree what they are.
It's the politicians - the ones who know better but who are happy to bow down and kiss Trump's behind just to keep in power - who are the loathsome ones.
The ones who knew better was the deep state justice department officials who went after Flynn. Mueller who went after Trump. Pelosi who concocted that impeachment travesty. There were a lot of people who knew better for the past four years, they weren't on Trump's side.
Does it not make you wonder that nobody - nobody - except Trumpites thinks there was fraud?
It should make you wonder why you believe this statement is true. I know the answer. You are in the media bubble that dare not prick it's scum so you have no idea. Perhaps you would know something of you got out of the echo chamber.
Every agency, every authority, US, Republican, Democrat, international which has investigated found no fraud
And you keep proving my point. You literally believe they have found no fraud.
and, in fact, found the election to be the most secure in decades.
Oh my goodness, you are in la la land. They have video tape of election officials evicting the Republican poll watchers then pulling out boxes of illegal ballots and running them through the machines in the dead of night. Testimony from a truck driver who hauled 15 pallets of filled out ballots from New York to PA election night.
Do you not wonder why some agency, some judge, some group somewhere that isn't tied to Trump hasn't found any of this evidence?
You have hundreds and hundreds of people having given sworn affidavits so this question is falsely predicated.
Does it not ever occur to you that the only people throwing out this evidence are Trumpites?
You dismiss all evidence you don't want to believe by attacking the messenger as a Trumpite. You've created a totalism.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
There you go, deny the existence of the times in which you live. That sounds like a winner.
Nope. You invented something that did not occur. I did not deny the existence of anything that actually happened.
My memory doesn't reset to zero every morning when I punch the alarm clock so I do carry a residual memory of the times in which I live.
Nope. You invented something that did not occur. I did not deny the existence of anything that actually happened.
You literally have zero knowledge of the times in which you live. You could not possibly make that statement otherwise.
False again. All the claims you made have been repeated debunked. Sorry if you don't like that.
Giuliani mentioned this in the hearings in Michigan.
That is no support for anything at all.

Do you have any actual support for the claim?
We are literally separated by facts. We can't agree what they are.
It happens with Trumpites.
The ones who knew better was the deep state justice department officials who went after Flynn. Mueller who went after Trump. Pelosi who concocted that impeachment travesty. There were a lot of people who knew better for the past four years, they weren't on Trump's side.
We're talking about the election. Try to keep up.
It should make you wonder why you believe this statement is true. I know the answer. You are in the media bubble that dare not prick it's scum so you have no idea. Perhaps you would know something of you got out of the echo chamber.

And you keep proving my point. You literally believe they have found no fraud.

Oh my goodness, you are in la la land. They have video tape of election officials evicting the Republican poll watchers then pulling out boxes of illegal ballots and running them through the machines in the dead of night. Testimony from a truck driver who hauled 15 pallets of filled out ballots from New York to PA election night.

You have hundreds and hundreds of people having given sworn affidavits so this question is falsely predicated.
Oh, and they do not have "video tape of election officials evicting the Republican poll watchers then pulling out boxes of illegal ballots and running them through the machines in the dead of night". That is nonsense.

But all of these can be summed up easily - provide details of any independent agency who has found any fraud. Any.
You dismiss all evidence you don't want to believe by attacking the messenger as a Trumpite. You've created a totalism.
I dismiss all unsupported evidence. You want to believe everything that supports your unreasonable assertions about fraud.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
Nope. You invented something that did not occur. I did not deny the existence of anything that actually happened.

Nope. You invented something that did not occur. I did not deny the existence of anything that actually happened.
Were I only so creative.
False again. All the claims you made have been repeated debunked.
How do you "debunk" evidence that doesn't exist?
Sorry if you don't like that.
Don't be sorry, I don't fret over imaginary troubles.
That is no support for anything at all.
He's only the guy who convicted Michael Milken, why believe him?
Do you have any actual support for the claim?
Giuliani is dealing with the affiants face to face so he knows. Your denial of this is predicated on absolutely nothing.
It happens with Trumpites.
It happens with blue pill main stream slumberers.
We're talking about the election. Try to keep up.
Exactly, the last four years didn't happen, reality began at six o'clock this morning when your alarm went off. It's always the same with the left.
Oh, and they do not have "video tape of election officials evicting the Republican poll watchers then pulling out boxes of illegal ballots and running them through the machines in the dead of night". That is nonsense.
It's nonsense to you because you only watch the news whose business model is to not tell you anything you don't want to know. The rest of America has seen the videos so it's not nonsense to them.
But all of these can be summed up easily
Everything you don't wish to believe is summed up easily for you because that is what the blue pill news does.
- provide details of any independent agency who has found any fraud. Any.
So let me get this straight, if the swamp says it's true, you're on board. So I've learned absolutely nothing new.
I dismiss all unsupported evidence.
Evidence is support.
You want to believe everything that supports your unreasonable assertions about fraud.
People who are being beaten up, fired from their jobs, and so on, aren't swearing affidavits for their love of unreasonable assertions.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Were I only so creative.

How do you "debunk" evidence that doesn't exist?
The fact that it's been debunked makes it not evidence.
Don't be sorry, I don't fret over imaginary troubles.

He's only the guy who convicted Michael Milken, why believe him?

Giuliani is dealing with the affiants face to face so he knows. Your denial of this is predicated on absolutely nothing.
Giulian has already shown himself a liar on this issue.

I'll just put this down as another claim you can't support.
It happens with blue pill main stream slumberers.

Exactly, the last four years didn't happen, reality began at six o'clock this morning when your alarm went off.
If you say so.
It's always the same with the left.
Yes, I'm sure it is.
It's nonsense to you because you only watch the news whose business model is to not tell you anything you don't want to know. The rest of America has seen the videos so it's not nonsense to them.
It's nonsense in reality.
Everything you don't wish to believe is summed up easily for you because that is what the blue pill news does.
Drivel.
So let me get this straight, if the swamp says it's true, you're on board. So I've learned absolutely nothing new.
So you can't show any independent agency who's found any fraud, but you don't want to admit that so you try to attack me instead. Yawn.
Evidence is support.

People who are being beaten up, fired from their jobs, and so on, aren't swearing affidavits for their love of unreasonable assertions.
Now they're being fired as well? Of course, you can support that claim, can't you? Can't you?
 

Thistle

Well-known member
The fact that it's been debunked makes it not evidence.
Amazing how you acknowledge it as evidence concurrent with your judgment that it had been debunked. And did I mention completely unbelievable. Look at the bright-side, think of it as four more years of that great CNN reporting, rather than four more years of Donald Trump.
Giulian has already shown himself a liar on this issue.
There, there now. I think that pillar of truth Adam Shiff is starting a support group for this.
I'll just put this down as another claim you can't support.
By which I believe you mean submit to the New York Times? They should go back to what they do best, writing puff pieces on Adolf Hitler.
If you say so.
More accurately, you live so.
Yes, I'm sure it is.
The stopped clock . . .
It's nonsense in reality.
Yet you condescend to quibble about it. Curious. Thou doth protest too much.
Like the Harlem Globetrotters.
So you can't show any independent agency
Correction, swamp.
who's found any fraud,
They can't find any evidence of mental decline in Biden either. Do you have a point?
but you don't want to admit that so you try to attack me instead. Yawn.
In point of fact, I've yawned quite a bit reading this post.
Now they're being fired as well? Of course, you can support that claim, can't you? Can't you?
Please, stop, the pressure, I just can't take it any more! Oh I'm sorry, I thought you may have had a point for a moment. Rudy has spoken to these affiants directly, there is no reason to question his testimony on the matter.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
There is no evidence of any malfeasance. Doing what you suggest will aid Trump in his efforts to steal the election.
I see that you still think that YOUR unbelief (atheism) is a superpower. When in reality your willful blindness is just a projection of your unbelief (atheism). These monkeys want us to disbelieve what is occurring right in front of our eyes. Peddle that brain infection elsewhere silly.
 
Last edited:

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Amazing how you acknowledge it as evidence concurrent with your judgment that it had been debunked. And did I mention completely unbelievable. Look at the bright-side, think of it as four more years of that great CNN reporting, rather than four more years of Donald Trump.

There, there now. I think that pillar of truth Adam Shiff is starting a support group for this.

By which I believe you mean submit to the New York Times? They should go back to what they do best, writing puff pieces on Adolf Hitler.

More accurately, you live so.

The stopped clock . . .

Yet you condescend to quibble about it. Curious. Thou doth protest too much.

Like the Harlem Globetrotters.

Correction, swamp.

They can't find any evidence of mental decline in Biden either. Do you have a point?

In point of fact, I've yawned quite a bit reading this post.

Please, stop, the pressure, I just can't take it any more! Oh I'm sorry, I thought you may have had a point for a moment. Rudy has spoken to these affiants directly, there is no reason to question his testimony on the matter.
So basically we excuse the complete absence of evidence because a proven repeat liar says it's there. I'm sure the courts will agree. That is, if Rudy ever decides to take it to the courts again, after they kicked him to the curb many times so far.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
I see that you still think that YOUR unbelief (atheism) is a superpower.
No, you don't think that. You completely imagine it.
When in reality your willful blindness is just a projection of your unbelief (atheism).
Just as your wilful blindness is a projection of your unbelief in infinitely many things. Whatever you say about us as unbelievers is equally true of you.
These monkeys want us to disbelieve what is occurring right in front of our eyes. Peddle that brain infection elsewhere silly.
Try to make sense next time.
 

Tercon

Well-known member
No, you don't think that. You completely imagine it.

Just as your wilful blindness is a projection of your unbelief in infinitely many things. Whatever you say about us as unbelievers is equally true of you.

Try to make sense next time.
It's only unbelievers who think their unbelief exists in reality silly.
 
Top