Election Coverage And Results Thread

[holdover]

BARTIROMO: President Trump’s legal team has just three weeks left to gather enough evidence of fraud to contest the 2020 election results in court, something Sidney Powell, one of the lead attorneys on the case, says she can do. SIDNEY POWELL, ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yes, I fully expect we will be able to prove all of it in court within the next two weeks, although the fraud case itself doesn’t have to be done within the two weeks.

They have weeks left to produce evidence. Nobody is going to know Jack shit until then. even CNN and FOX wont know.

 

[Darth]

Here's an analysis from no less than Alan Dershowitz about what he believes will end up before SCOTUS.

He doesn't think they will prevail, but only because he doesn't think they can call enough votes into question. He believes the legal reasoning is sound.

Honestly for someone with such strong opinions on the subject I would have expected you to be better informed about the process.

Dershowitz: Trump Has 'Two or Three Legal Constitutional Paths' -- 'I Don't Think that the Election Is Going to Be Reversed'

During this week's broadcast of FNC's "Sunday Morning Futures," constitutional legal scholar and Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said there was still a legal path forward for the Trump campaign to win the presidency, but he did not think it was likely. | Clips

www.breitbart.com

The problem is of course your glaring intellectual dishonesty. You didn't account for that. That may be where the confusion is arising.

If you'll notice you moved from "prove there was no fraud" to "we're waiting to get to the SCOTUS to present the case."

But it's OK, big news is coming tomorrow.

 

[Darth]

BARTIROMO: President Trump’s legal team has just three weeks left to gather enough evidence of fraud to contest the 2020 election results in court, something Sidney Powell, one of the lead attorneys on the case, says she can do.

They have weeks left to produce evidence. Nobody is going to know Jack shit until then. even CNN and FOX wont know.

Gather evidence!?

But we just concluded he had it!

If I didn't know better I'd say this was just being made up on the spot because one side just can't accept it.

 

[holdover]

Big news is going to come one way or the the other. let the process play out

 

[holdover]

Gather evidence!?

But we just concluded he had it!

LOL, you dont understand the process, just give it a little while OK? Not tommorrow morning , wait till Jan 1 or so

 

[Darth]

LOL, you dont understand the process, just give it a little while OK? Not tommorrow morning , wait till Jan 1 or so

Is Santa going to bring it?

 

[holdover]

No they already made thier case, its a done deal. the evidence they have will be presented to the courts. not on CNN

 

[spat]

The problem is of course your glaring intellectual dishonesty. You didn't account for that. That may be where the confusion is arising.

If you'll notice you moved from "prove there was no fraud" to "we're waiting to get to the SCOTUS to present the case."

But it's OK, big news is coming tomorrow.

They are 2 completely separate issues.

Nobody ever said "prove there was no fraud". There is always fraud. There is proof of fraud all over the news, provided you don’t listen exclusively to the left. Signed affidavits, eye witness evidence, etc. What more do you want ?

There has certainly been at least some fraud in every election since 1776.

You repeatedly demanded proof of fraud, but nobody felt like looking it up, because they knew you were not arguing in good faith. The existence of fraud is so self evident that only a troll would argue otherwise.

The question is "was there enough fraud to affect the outcome of the election".

The people deserve an election they can have confidence in. This was not it. Do you disagree with that ?


The other issue is "who will be POTUS on Jan 22nd" That remains to be seen, and that is what we are waiting for SCOTUS on.

 

[Darth]

You repeatedly demanded proof of fraud, but nobody felt like looking it up, because they knew you were not arguing in good faith. The existence of fraud is so self evident that only a troll would argue otherwise.

We all know the reason for the "can't be bothered"/ "do your research" line is because no actual evidence exits. It's always like that.

@CaseHardened, there you go btw. "Troll" is the new "racist."

 

[holdover]

DERSHOWITZ: Well, let me give you my completely objective, not wishful thinking, constitutional analysis.

They have two or three legal constitutional paths. For example, in Pennsylvania, they have two very strong legal arguments, one, that the courts changed what the legislature did about counting ballots after the end of Election Day.

That’s a winning issue in the Supreme Court. I don’t necessarily support it, but it’s a winning issue in the Supreme Court. And Justice Alito has already hinted that’s a winning issue.


They also have a winning issue on the Supreme Court on equal protection, that some counties allowed flawed ballots to be cured, while others didn’t. Bush vs. Gore suggests that an equal protection argument can prevail.

The problem with that argument is, they don’t have the numbers necessarily to support it. If it’s right that Biden is ahead by some 70,000 or 80,000 votes, they have to show enough contested votes, under those two legal theories, to change the outcome.

The other legal theory they had, which is a potentially strong one, is that the computers, either fraudulently or by glitches, changed hundreds of thousands of votes. There are enough votes to make a difference, but I haven’t seen the evidence to support that.

So, in one case, they don’t have the numbers. In another case, they don’t seem yet to have the evidence. Maybe they do. I haven’t seen it. But the legal theory is there to support them if they have the numbers and they have the evidence.



DERSHOWITZ: Well, evidence is very difficult to bring within two weeks or the three-week period. You need to have witnesses, experts subject to cross-examination, and findings by a court. (what Ive been saying all along!)


DERSHOWITZ: If the evidence is there, then there will be a trial.

 

[Dr. Evil]

If it makes it to SCOTUS they’ll laugh it out of court, too.

Now Christie is telling trump to shut up:

Chris Christie tells Trump to end election lawsuits, calls his legal team 'national embarrassment'

Christie described Trump's legal team as a "national embarrassment" and Powell's explosive claims as "outrageous conduct."

www.cnbc.com

Wonder how long until a tweet from trump about how Christie is a deep swamp rino.

Maybe you would like to throw a Romney quote/article up there too. Crispy Creme always was a douche.

 

[spat]

The left:

There was no fraud, show me proof of the fraud.

Trump's legal team:

Here's a pallet of affidavits, eye witness statements, and audit logs from voting machines.


The left:

Yes, but that's fraud you found, those votes will be corrected. Show me proof of fraud that you can't find.


And yes, @Darth, you're included in with "the left" on this one.

 

[spat]

We all know the reason for the "can't be bothered"/ "do your research" line is because no actual evidence exits. It's always like that.

@CaseHardened, there you go btw. "Troll" is the new "racist."

Arguing that vote fraud didn't exist in the 2020 election is the definition of trolling.

 

[spat]

We all know the reason for the "can't be bothered"/ "do your research" line is because no actual evidence exits. It's always like that.

@CaseHardened, there you go btw. "Troll" is the new "racist."

We aren’t likely to spend time proving the world isn't flat for you either. And arguing otherwise when you *know* it not to be true is the definition of trolling.

Enjoy the following troll chow.

The Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Map

The Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Map is an interactive tool providing a sampling of proven instances of election fraud across the U.S. From @HeritageDataviz

www.heritage.org

 

[Darth]

Arguing that vote fraud didn't exist in the 2020 election is the definition of trolling.

And, again, the textbook example of intellectual dishonesty.

I certainly hope Trump's "fraud defense team" doesn't use these tactics.

 

[spat]

And, again, the textbook example of intellectual dishonesty.

I certainly hope Trump's "fraud defense team" doesn't use these tactics.

In what way have I been intellectually dishonest ?

 

[Jmac00]

this is VERY DISTURBING, It seems Pres. Trumps legal team is now distancing themselves from Powell? which tells me, she DOES NOT HAVE THE EVIDENCE she says she has. I am now very concerned this whole law suite shit is going in the toilet, fast

 

[Darth]

In what way have I been intellectually dishonest ?

Inventing claims made by the other party.

 

[spat]

Inventing claims made by the other party.

You have spent half this thread demanding evidence, you're now denying it ?

 

[Darth]

this is VERY DISTURBING, It seems Pres. Trumps legal team is now distancing themselves from Powell? which tells me, she DOES NOT HAVE THE EVIDENCE she says she has. I am now very concerned this whole law suite shit is going in the toilet, fast

View attachment 97012

It's almost as if it was a show to rile up those gullible enough to believe it.

 

[holdover]

Rudy W. Giuliani

November 14 at 5:29 PM ·

682K mail-in ballots in Philidelphia and Allegheny County were counted WITHOUT observers present.
A direct violation of a Court Order.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL and irredeemably compromised.





See the results and other info about the 2020 US Election.
See Election Results



Rudy W. Giuliani

November 13 at 5:58 PM ·

REVEALED: Sworn Evidence Of Pervasive Voter Fraud #Affidavits



Rudy W. Giuliani

November 14 at 5:31 PM ·

Not allowing observes into counting rooms = DUE PROCESS and EQUAL PROTECTION violations!
9.6K9.6K
872 Comments
650 Shares
Like

Comment

Share

 

[Darth]

You have spent half this thread demanding evidence, you're now denying it ?

I feel like a broken record now.

Please quote where I claimed anything resembling:

Arguing that vote fraud didn't exist in the 2020 election

 

[ArmedCorgi]

this is VERY DISTURBING, It seems Pres. Trumps legal team is now distancing themselves from Powell? which tells me, she DOES NOT HAVE THE EVIDENCE she says she has. I am now very concerned this whole law suite shit is going in the toilet, fast

View attachment 97012

So that explains why she was there at the fucking press conference with Giuliani?????? I mean, I guess it's not unusual for people not part of a legal team get to stand next to the lawyers and also speak about the case to the press. This makes no sense.

 

[Jmac00]

So that explains why she was there at the fucking press conference with Giuliani?????? I mean, I guess it's not unusual for people not part of a legal team get to stand next to the lawyers and also speak about the case to the press. This makes no sense.

hey I could be wrong. But from the wording, doesn't sound like Rudy is trying to move away from Sidney???

 

[ArmedCorgi]

hey I could be wrong. But from the wording, doesn't sound like Rudy is trying to move away from Sidney???

It looks frigging fake. Why is the statement in quotes? The lettering is darker and looks photoshopped plus it doesn't make any sense. If Powell wasn't involved the Trump campaign would have shut her down long ago. Where did you get this?

 

[Dr. Evil]

Saw this from an attorney elsewhere. Personally, no clue why the change at this time.

"This may not be a matter of Team Trump cutting Sidney loose. It could very well be a joint/strategic decision, perhaps even her own idea. This creates a separate track that allows her to pursue the wholesale fraud case (which could take months to litigate), beyond the election certification and inauguration.

This way, even if Biden become president, we have a chance to prove the true depth and breadth of the fraud after the fact, and do serious damage to the Democrats, guaranteeing a massive red wave in '22 & '24."

 

[Jmac00]

It looks frigging fake. Why is the statement in quotes? The lettering is darker and looks photoshopped plus it doesn't make any sense. If Powell wasn't involved the Trump campaign would have shut her down long ago. Where did you get this?

copy and pasted from another site

 

[Dr. Evil]

It looks frigging fake. Why is the statement in quotes? The lettering is darker and looks photoshopped plus it doesn't make any sense. If Powell wasn't involved the Trump campaign would have shut her down long ago. Where did you get this?

There are links about this on other news organizations.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Well, it's on Trumps campaign website so I guess it's true. Makes no sense to me. I'm really fucking tired of this bullshit.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Giuliani: Sidney Powell Not Part of Trump Legal Team

Sidney Powell is not part of President Trump's legal team currently trying to overturn election results in several key swing states, his personal attorney Rudy Guiliani said in a statement released Sunday afternoon.

www.newsmax.com