US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So not only are the trump lawyers quoting the movie my cousin vinny to make legal arguments but now they have found the real life version of one of Cecily strong’s characters from SNL during a hearing in Michigan ffs. And the funny thing is that Rudy guilianni was trying to reign her in. Rudy is now the voice of reason.

Welp, thats it...we didnt think 2020 had anything left, but....we have literally entered the Twilight Zone now!

In what fantastical world do these supposed learned individuals think putting people with such insane theories into a court of law will somehow work in their favour? Is it just to keep cases going so daddy Don could slap "Election is still under doubt, now ignore the publics votes and election college and all that dumb democracy stuff just say I'm President again!" into the faces of Republican lawmakers?

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Let's also not forget that the "affidavit" that she keeps talking about was dismissed in court a few weeks ago as "simply not credible.”




They've already been laughed out of court with her evidence , yet they roll her out again here..

The best is every time they get laughed out of court we get the Trump zealots telling us that "yeah, but the next case is the big one"

How anyone can't see through this charade at this stage deserves to lose any money they give to Don the con.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

The best is every time they get laughed out of court we get the Trump zealots telling us that "yeah, but the next case is the big one"

How anyone can't see through this charade at this stage deserves to lose any money they give to Don the con.

Anyone would begin to question why they didn't start with the really really solid evidence. Strange approach alright, but little by little I'm sure they'll come up with something that isn't total utter scuttery nonsense, right?

check_six wrote: »

My guess would be that they raised a lot more than the cost of the various court cases and showcase fake 'hearings'.

$170 million raised so far, of which $150 million goes nowhere near the legal 'fights', given that the first $5,000 or so of each donation for the 'legal fund' is going instead on paying off RNC /Campaign debts and adding to another Trump PAC.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Question - If either or both of the GOP candidates in Georgia were to lose the run-off elections , It's fair to say that they will almost certainly follow the Trump plan and appeal/challenge every possible thing.

What happens to the Seats in the Senate during that timeframe and how long can they drag it out?

For example , lets say the Democrats take both seats - When do those winners take their seats and when is the vote for the leader of the Senate and would that be the deadline for any challenges to be resolved?

That's a great question.

AFAIK, the current Senate ends on January 3rd. Accordingly, I'm assuming both Loeffler and Perdue are no longer Senators on that date. So, from 3rd January until such time as election results are certified and then the incoming Senators take their seats, GA will be without a sitting Senator.

Now, there may be some law whereby the Governor may appoint someone on a temporary basis while the election plays out- I don't know. He did appoint Loeffler on that basis, but that was in 2019, with more than a year to go to an election. Would that be done to keep a seat warm for.just a few days or weeks? I don't know. But nothing would surprise me.

In any event, the 'interregnum' is unlikely to help Democrats one way or the other, unless Mc Connell and Pence preside over shenannigans and some 'honourable' GOPpers cross the floor.

Your post is all over the place, MisterAnarchy. Are you saying that these people are unqualified? Or that they are "members" of BLM?

beggars_bush wrote: »

How much did he raise to battle this in the courts?

Fully explained here:



Practically nothing... 60% goes to Trump's Save America PAC (<slush fund, not for wasting on useless court cases)
40% goes to the the RNC
basically 0% funding for the legal cases, a total con.


Think they are "funding" the "Subvert the Peoples Vote/ Dismantle the US Democracy" campaign with loose change they find at the back of the couch.

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

I do not believe these people were selected based on qualifications and experience.
Its wokery identity politics, picking people because of their race and gender.

Ah ok. Are the white people also only picked because they're white? Or is it just that white people are the only ones qualified?

OS_Head wrote: »

GEORGIA:

2,056

felons illegally voted

66,248

under 18 voted

2,423

weren’t registered at all

1,043

used a PO Box

4,926

voted past the reg. date

10,315

died before the election

395

voted in two states

15,700

moved out of state

40,279

changed county and didn’t re-register to vote. Nope, no wide spread fraud here that would change the course of the election. Now move along please...

https://streamable.com/4gcp0i

To go over each and every bit of this bullsh*t takes time, and that is the point. By the time each one has been proved false the damage is done and the grifters have moved onto the next lie. But when looked at it usually comes down to people who just having the same name as someone else. Why do you immediately believe it and regurgitate it without questioning it? This would be really easy to prove in court but I guarantee you it won't be

As for the female press team, you are leaving out some of their colleagues.

https://mobile.twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1333244893993578502

Also, can you just tell us what date or milestone in the process, you will finally say the election is over? When the Electoral College votes, when Trump concedes, when Biden is sworn in? Just let us know when the whining will stop.

OS_Head wrote: »

This is not an MSM story that is trying to sway public opinion to steal an election with false claims. This is hard evidence that will be put up in a court of law. That's a big difference here that you fail to grasp.

Your post isn't hard evidence though.

Can you show us where the hard evidence is?

Also when will it be put up?

My understanding is that this was in the MSM and this was in a court of law and they kicked it out because of a lack of evidence.

So now republican lawmakers are having these meaningless 'hearings' to placate Trump and allow him to continue to fundraise and you're watching it in OAN because other networks are reporting on other issues.

Do you ever think you might be wrong about this election thing?