FINALLY - An honest review of ballots

[Kenny]

At this time, how many of these lawsuits have succeeded on the basis of the merits?

Good question and i honestly don't have a list. I don't have the list of those that were made by individuals, other organizations or Trump et al. I don't have a list of which ones rejected on standing (only that I know that some were rejected on that basis). I don't know which ones were rejected on merits as i don't know how they came to that conclusion.

So, rather than studying and spending time all the possibilities (failed) - I concentrate on the ones that move forward of which we do have some.

 

[Kenny]

There were no "dueling electors." Biden won that election as well. Biden will be sworn as president in a month, and Trump will have to find a new home.

Just In: 7 States Cast Electors For Trump In Historic Election Battle

 

[Kenny]

Where, O where do you get your information? (that was rhetorical - your source was the Washington Post - a rag)

Absentee ballot signature audit ordered after Georgia election

The signature audit is scheduled to be completed in two weeks. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation and the secretary of state’s office will review a statistically significant sample of absentee ballot envelopes from both the primary and general election in Cobb County.
​

Georgia to audit one county's signatures on ballot envelopes

“Now that the signature matching has been attacked again and again with no evidence, I feel we need to take steps to restore confidence in our elections,” Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said during a news conference as he announced the audit that will focus on Cobb County in suburban Atlanta.
​

That sure doesn't sound like a "substantive and complete review" as you called it.

It is being done to shove a shut-the-eff-up-stick up the *** of the idiots who keep clamoring that the signature verification was not done correctly the first time.

​

So, here you go again, posting nonsense.
I have asked you to provide evidence for your ridiculous assertions many times in the past. You have failed to do so. Do try to remember allegations are not evidence.




Oh, there are still some cases under litigation? Care to list them so we can see what you are going on about.


Think!

I have posted it multiple times (sources) - I don't have time if you keep ignoring them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Good question and i honestly don't have a list. I don't have the list of those that were made by individuals, other organizations or Trump et al. I don't have a list of which ones rejected on standing (only that I know that some were rejected on that basis). I don't know which ones were rejected on merits as i don't know how they came to that conclusion.

So, rather than studying and spending time all the possibilities (failed) - I concentrate on the ones that move forward of which we do have some.

It should not be that hard. All but one of the Trump law suits have lost. And the one that he won did not change anything one iota. As one lawyer put it "More of a participation award than a victory".

So, how many lawsuits of Trump were won based upon their merit?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Just In: 7 States Cast Electors For Trump In Historic Election Battle

Biden won the EC, no matter what nonsense and overtly biased garbage you believe.
2020 Election Results Live

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just In: 7 States Cast Electors For Trump In Historic Election Battle

Nope, those were just fools playing dress up. Each of those states had only one set of electors. Here is a clue. Try to find reliable sources.

But I did find the attempt of the Michigan "alternate electors" attempt to enter and register their vote was particularly hilarious. Comedy gold!

 

[fantome profane]

Just In: 7 States Cast Electors For Trump In Historic Election Battle

What the Conservative Daily Post is not saying is that these “Trump Electors” have absolutely no official standing. They are not electors anymore than you or I am, regardless of what they choose to call themselves. There are 538 official certified electors, no more and no less. And approximately 7.8 billion people who are not.

 

[Kenny]

What the Conservative Daily Post is not saying is that these “Trump Electors” have absolutely no official standing. They are not electors anymore than you or I am, regardless of what they choose to call themselves. There are 538 official certified electors, no more and no less. And approximately 7.8 billion people who are not.

I don't believe that's true. In Hawaii, 1960, there were dueling electors that had to be resolved also. Also in 1876, So I wouldn't call it "no official standing".

 

[fantome profane]

I don't believe that's true. In Hawaii, 1960, there were dueling electors that had to be resolved also. Also in 1876, So I wouldn't call it "no official standing".

Then tell us what “official standing” they have. These people were not selected by any of these States. The States choose their electors, and these guy ain’t them. They were not chosen by any State congress or in accordance of any State constitution. They were just pick by some guys in the State, but that is not the same as being picked by the State.

So explain it to us, what official standing do these guys have? What makes them different than any other person in that State? If next week a bunch of people meet at an Applebee’s and over breakfast they and pick some more “electors” and they say they are going to cast their votes for Hillary Clinton, do those electors have “official standing” or not?

 

[McBell]

I don't believe that's true. In Hawaii, 1960, there were dueling electors that had to be resolved also. Also in 1876, So I wouldn't call it "no official standing".

Educate yourself about it:

1960 United States presidential election in Hawaii - Wikipedia
​

 

[McBell]

Then tell us what “official standing” they have. These people were not selected by any of these States. The States choose their electors, and these guy ain’t them. They were not chosen by any State congress or in accordance of any State constitution. They were just pick by some guys in the State, but that is not the same as being picked by the State.

So explain it to us, what official standing do these guys have? What makes them different than any other person in that State? If next week a bunch of people meet at an Applebee’s and over breakfast they and pick some more “electors” and they say they are going to cast their votes for Hillary Clinton, do those electors have “official standing” or not?

At this point it appears he is parroting talking points.

 

[Kenny]

Educate yourself about it:

1960 United States presidential election in Hawaii - Wikipedia
​

Likewise:

Electoral Count Act - Wikipedia

United States presidential election of 1876 - The disputed election

 

[Mr Spinkles]

What the Conservative Daily Post is not saying is that these “Trump Electors” have absolutely no official standing. They are not electors anymore than you or I am, regardless of what they choose to call themselves. There are 538 official certified electors, no more and no less. And approximately 7.8 billion people who are not.

Hey, no fair! I didn’t know we could appoint Biden electors in red states like Texas, Ohio and Florida. Why aren’t the Biden electors being allowed to fulfill their duties in those states?

I still say Biden won by a LOT more than 8 million votes until all this gets resolved beyond all dispute. Which will presumably be thousands of years from now, by future historians with the technology to prove stuff even to those who engage in make-believe.

 

[ecco]

I have posted it multiple times (sources) - I don't have time if you keep ignoring them.

I showed where you got your information (Washington Times) so why are you saying I ignored it?

On the other hand you don't want to acknowledge that your OP is based on incorrect information...IT'S NOT ALL OF GEORGIA! IT'S ONE COUNTY.

Your rag had it wrong and you never bothered to check their dumb-*** allegation with reliable sources. That's nothing new. You have a habit of posting articles you have been pointed to and blindly accepting (hoping) that the story is true.

 

[ecco]

Good question and i honestly don't have a list.

So, rather than studying and spending time all the possibilities (failed) - I concentrate on the ones that move forward of which we do have some.

Lists have been posted. You just want to ignore all the 50+ cases Trump lost and continue hoping for a new miracle.

Two weeks ago you said we should wait until the cases got to the Supreme Court. On the cases the Supreme Court did rule - Trump's cases were kicked out. There were others the Court wouldn't even look at because they were dismissed in lower courts with prejudice.

But here is a new miracle in the making for you:

Trump wants Supreme Court to overturn Pa. election results

WASHINGTON (AP) — Undeterred by dismissals and admonitions from judges, President Donald Trump’s campaign continued with its unprecedented efforts to overturn the results of the Nov 3. election Sunday, saying it had filed a new petition with the Supreme Court.

The petition seeks to reverse a trio of Pennsylvania Supreme Court cases having to do with mail-in ballots and asks the court to reject voters’ will and allow the Pennsylvania General Assembly to pick its own slate of electors.

While the prospect of the highest court in the land throwing out the results of a democratic election based on unfounded charges of voter fraud is extraordinarily unlikely, it wouldn’t change the outcome. President-elect Joe Biden would still be the winner even without Pennsylvania because of his wide margin of victory in the Electoral College.

“The petition seeks all appropriate remedies, including vacating the appointment of electors committed to Joseph Biden and allowing the Pennsylvania General Assembly to select their replacements,” Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani said in a statement.

He is asking the court to move swiftly so it can rule before Congress meets on Jan. 6 to tally the vote of the Electoral College, which decisively confirmed Biden’s win with 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232. But the justices are not scheduled to meet again, even privately, until Jan 8, two days after Congress counts votes.
​

You probably don't understand, so I'll spell it out for you.

​

Trump/Guiliani know the Court won't meet in time to make a ruling that would affect the outcome.

Trump/Guiliani know nothing will prevent Trump's ouster on Jan 20.

So why are they filing another destined-to-accomplish-nothing suit? To keep giving (false) hope to the Sheeples and to keep raking in the donations.

They say there's one born every minute and 74,223,744 people are proof of that.

​

 

[ecco]

Just In: 7 States Cast Electors For Trump In Historic Election Battle

"Just In?" Really? Don't you ever bother to even glance at the articles you copy/paste links to? Your article is from Dec 15. One week ago. It was immediately debunked.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/technology/fake-dueling-slates-of-electors.html

Tracking Viral Misinformation

No, there aren’t ‘alternate electors’ who can vote for President Trump.

Dec. 15, 2020, 4:35 p.m. ET
Dec. 15, 2020, 4:35 p.m. ET
By Nick Corasaniti and Jim Rutenberg




Georgia’s actual members of the Electoral College cast their ballots for Joseph R. Biden Jr. in Atlanta on Monday.Credit...Nicole Craine for The New York Times
​

Once the Electoral College has met and every state’s election has been certified, there is no constitutional provision for an “alternate slate” of electors. A group of people who gather in a room and claim they are electors, as state-party-backed Republicans did in a few states on Monday, have no more authority than if the people reading this article decided that they, too, wanted to be members of the Electoral College.

So while Republicans in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada and Michigan followed the White House’s lead, making or discussing moves to form their own competing slates of pro-Trump electors, it was Electoral College slates are tied to the winner of the popular vote in each state, and all five of those states have certified their results in favor of President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.

The most the Republicans could do was claim a symbolic moment, saying that the people who showed up would have been the slates of electors had President Trump won those states. But since he lost them, and numerous state and federal courts have rejected his and his allies’ baseless claims of voting fraud, these groups have no actual significance.

​

What is your source? CDP. What is CDP? Is it anything more than just a website put up by a Sheeple.

THINK!

 

[ecco]

I don't believe that's true. In Hawaii, 1960, there were dueling electors that had to be resolved also.

There were not "dueling electors" in Hawaii in 1960.

Do you understand why there were two sets of electors?

If you understand, then please tell us in your own words what happened in Hawaii in 1960 and then try really hard to see how that does not support your hopes and dreams.

THINK!

 

[ecco]

At this point it appears he is parroting talking points.

"At this point"!?! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I wrote more but deleted it because I would have been sanctioned for ignoring RF rules.

 

[Kenny]

There were not "dueling electors" in Hawaii in 1960.

Do you understand why there were two sets of electors?

If you understand, then please tell us in your own words what happened in Hawaii in 1960 and then try really hard to see how that does not support your hopes and dreams.

THINK!

Don't need to explain... one person said there was no such thing and it has happened twice. This will be the third.

 

[ecco]

Don't need to explain... one person said there was no such thing and it has happened twice.

You are right - there is no need to explain. You cannot comprehend the truth even when it is carefully explained to you.

If you can't/won't understand what happened in Hawaii then that is your problem.

You may now continue to wallow in your blissful willful ignorance.

This will be the third.

Which Governors are going to send pro-Trump electors? If you cannot answer this then you have no reason to ridiculously assert "This will be the third".