2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

Status
Not open for further replies.
BUT MUH COVID
FUCK YO COVID LIKE I FUCK YO MUTHA'S DRYER THAN THE SARAH'S CUNT. Would be the reply if I were a triggered RD winger. :P But seriously...Covid is such a lame reason why no in person court hearing....and voting.
It's almost as if a public skype call allows other people to find your IP address and fuck with your connection.
#tinfoilcap...I'll take it with a grain of salt.

New defense counsel, he's not helping himself with multiple ad hominems and sounding like he's about to start shouting
Oh, is that who is talking right now? I can't tell!
 
What's really funny is that highly suspect 24 hour old account that posted the Trump election fraud hotline had me google it, because I thought it would be some 1900 phone sex number or something. (Do they still have those? god I'm old)

Instead, thousands of smug redditors and imgurs posting that phone number everywhere they can with instructions not (wink wink nudge nudge smug smug) to prank call it.

1605647821581.png


Now, I'm not saying I'm looking forward to the boogaloo. But I will be breaking out the bubbly when these fuckers start their mental breakdowns if Trump wins, or when they finally fuck around enough and find out with the right in America.
 
Apparently rigging an election doesn't harm anyone


they're trying to fix a broken mic now fucking kek

EDIT:



They haven't even tried to justify their obvious ballot fraud and instead they tried to argue that THE PLAINTIFF CANNOT PROVE ANY HARM WAS COMMITED. Now they're trying to argue that Equal Protection law doesn't apply.

Some sort of absolutely fucking insane defense. A coup does not actually cause any harm, ergo no one can complain about it. Or somesuch?

Apparently the PA Supremes went full party line 5-2 on it. Just absolute fucking madness, of the "these people should be impeached for this" variety.

Attorney confirmed for browsing the TES thread
 

you NEED to check the link above to read for yourself their arguments from the point at which he starts bolding the comments and listing like "1-" "2-" etc.

He's taking forever to update because this idiot keeps shouting and his mic is already broken so it's painful to hear and even harder to decypher, but he's just going insane, just to quote one:

"The idea that thousands of voters have been disenfranchised is misguided, not happening, not available under PA law."​


This is how they claim no harm was done by the rigging everyone, this is their claim:

YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO FEEL ANGRY THE ELECTION WAS RIGGED, SERF, THE LAW DOESN'T ALLOW IT!

No harm was commited because we won't recognize legally that harm can be commited. BY A COUP D'ETAT! But really I'm waiting for them to get all this part, because he sounds absolutely insane, both in form and function, he's going off the rails with some obvious bullshit.
 
The mistake was giving Democrats the right to count the votes unsupervised.
Want to know the -ultimate- salt? If they really cracked own on the fake votes and it turns out that the black vote was always way more conservative than it was, and it only looked like it wasn't due to using them as fake votes.

I doubt it is true, though I do suspect that the actual proportion of African support for Republicans may be higher than it appears.
It's been 14 minutes and the hearing still hasn't started.

I bet the judge is recovering from a hangover.
"Oh fuck, why did I have to get THIS case?"
PA SC just ruled the states handling of election observers was legal.

https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1328791284975362048

Apparently blocking international watchdogs is within PA law now
Assume ANYTHING in PA that goes to the PASC will be ruled in democrats favor. The PASC is pozzed to fuck.
 
Defense argues that plaintiff has happened upon different election/ballot handling procedures in different counties that yields different voting results, rather than violations of the Equal Protections clause.
Isn't that the same argument that was rejected in bush v gore and got Bush the win?
 
Twitter is smugging out about the "massive Trump Loss" on this call.

But we already knew the PA Supremes were going to find the PA Supremes did nothing wrong. This is just a speed bump on the way to the SCOTUS.

And the defense's argument is literally "Fraud doesn't harm any one ergo you can't sue about it." Which as others have mentioned won't fly in front of the SCOTUS.
 
Catching up on everything.

It blows my mind that that was their defense for all of this shit. 30-40 years ago, no court would have dismissed anything after hearing something like that.

The PA Courts dismissing this isn't a surprising thing in the slightest. It's just proving the inevitable: That this is going to the SCOTUS, and it always was going to go to the SCOTUS. The biggest problem right now, though, is that the clock is definitely ticking.
Lol that you guys think Rudy's case is going well
 
Probably because it hadn't gone all the way to the state's Supreme Court until now.
This is what I said by the Dems running out the clock.

Most of the states said they would follow popular vote and not send a faithless elector.

Trump has less than four weeks to have six cases make it to the Supreme Court AND have them reach a verdict based off of evidence presented. The judges in the lower courts will draw this out until the end because it only benefits them. If Biden packs the Supreme Court like he is intending on doing, then this stall tactic is seen as a favor. "I got you the presidency by holding the line, so can I get a SCOTUS seat uncle Joe?".

This is a fraud that covers all three branches.
 
Hell if I know. This is still a different situation from Bush v. Gore, though.
It is. Quoting from Wikipedia:

Seven justices agreed that there was an Equal Protection Clause violation in using differing standards of determining a valid vote in different counties, causing an "unequal evaluation of ballots in various respects"
 
They haven't even tried to justify their obvious ballot fraud and instead they tried to argue that THE PLAINTIFF CANNOT PROVE ANY HARM WAS COMMITED. Now they're trying to argue that Equal Protection law doesn't apply.

Sound like they said it didn't apply because votes were counted properly in other countries? Did I hear that right? What actual fuck is up with this defense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back