It's the lack of evidentiary hearings that bothers me, but that really falls on the states more than the courts. I knew Trump was going to have an uphill battle. I knew that courts were going to be reluctant to accept these cases, and I have said that here multiple times. I had a strong feeling the Supreme Court would reject this case. However, considering the nature of this election, the anomalies that took place, and the fact that we are using more of the least secure method of voting (absentee ballots), I expected more states to thoroughly audit the ballots. Where states were unwilling to do this, I had hoped the courts would consider it. This, at the very least, reduces some of the mistrust in our current system. Transparency is important.

I believe democrats cheated. No one who holds power cares enough to do anything about it.

---

It's the lack of evidentiary hearings that bothers me, but that really falls on the states more than the courts. I knew Trump was going to have an uphill battle. I knew that courts were going to be reluctant to accept these cases, and I have said that here multiple times. I had a strong feeling the Supreme Court would reject this case. However, considering the nature of this election, the anomalies that took place, and the fact that we are using more of the least secure method of voting (absentee ballots), I expected more states to thoroughly audit the ballots. Where states were unwilling to do this, I had hoped the courts would consider it. This, at the very least, reduces some of the mistrust in our current system. Transparency is important.

I believe democrats cheated. No one who holds power cares enough to do anything about it.

I remember an old joke from the Cold War that's somewhat pertinent. 

Two Soviet tank Generals ran into each other on the streets of Paris. One asked the other, 'So, who won the air war?"

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I know what the argument was.  I'm telling you that argument is not valid.  The Constitution does not allow one state to sue another state over its voting practices.  So Texas does not have standing to sue Pennsylvania over its voting procedures.  Read the ruling: 

"The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot."

Under the Constitution, Texas has no right to tell Pennsylvania how to operate their state.  

And everyone with half a brain knew the Supreme Court would refuse to take this case on those grounds.  Which begs the question, how can a person with enough brains to get through law school not know this?  Of course the answer is, the AG of Texas knew his case was going to fail.  He did it because he is under investigation for various crimes, and he wants Trump to pardon him.  And everyone else who signed onto the case did it to curry favor with Trump.  

Secondly, you say, "...there's tons of evidence that the media refused to report right? Including audio confessions and video evidence..." 

If that was true, it would have been presented in court.  Fifty court cases, no evidence presented.  

And thirdly, I still don't understand how this "uprising" is supposed to take place.   You can march through the streets shouting and yelling and brandishing your weapons all day, and you will accomplish nothing.  

I can't take you seriously when you say "everyone with half a brain knew this case would be refused on those grounds". It's like you're playing the role of a smart man by using the power of hindsight. Yeah okay dude.

Also you mention "If that was true, it would have been presented in court.  Fifty court cases, no evidence presented. "

This demonstrates your lack of understanding as well. I guess I shouldn't be surprise because you hold opinions that are wildly outside the realms of reality. No evidence has been presented because no court case has been allowed to go to evidentiary hearings. Every judge keeps punting the case, either due to political bias or the judge getting death threats.

The "uprising" would take place with Trump declaring Martial Law and issuing FISA Warrants. His supporters will ensure he's successful by showing enough public support. If not, then they will start dragging politicians out into the streets and well, you can get creative after that. That's what a successful uprising would look like.

1) If you did not know that the Supreme Court would slam the door on that case, then your sources of information are severely lacking.  Almost everyone under the sun knew that was going to happen.  So I'm not playing the role of the "smart man," as you allege.  I only knew what almost everyone else knew.  There was not a snowball's chance in hell that under our Constitution, Texas could tell 4 other states how to run their elections. 

2) Trump's lawyers scream and yell about voter fraud, but when they get to court, what they present is not a case of voter fraud.  Over and over, they have admitted in court that they are not presenting a case of voter fraud.  They make allegations in public that they don't present in court.  

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no...nce-fraud/

3) Judges don't call evidentiary hearings unless you can show that you have some evidence to enter into the record.  Failing that, the judge will not bother to call an evidentiary hearing.  In these cases, judge after judge has excoriated Trump's lawyers for lack of evidence.  There was no evidentiary hearing because there was no evidence presented to the judge to persuade him or her to go forward with the case.  

4) As for your last paragraph, that speaks for itself.

---

---

I can't take you seriously when you say "everyone with half a brain knew this case would be refused on those grounds". It's like you're playing the role of a smart man by using the power of hindsight. Yeah okay dude.

Also you mention "If that was true, it would have been presented in court.  Fifty court cases, no evidence presented. "

This demonstrates your lack of understanding as well. I guess I shouldn't be surprise because you hold opinions that are wildly outside the realms of reality. No evidence has been presented because no court case has been allowed to go to evidentiary hearings. Every judge keeps punting the case, either due to political bias or the judge getting death threats.

The "uprising" would take place with Trump declaring Martial Law and issuing FISA Warrants. His supporters will ensure he's successful by showing enough public support. If not, then they will start dragging politicians out into the streets and well, you can get creative after that. That's what a successful uprising would look like.

1) If you did not know that the Supreme Court would slam the door on that case, then your sources of information are severely lacking.  Almost everyone under the sun knew that was going to happen.  So I'm not playing the role of the "smart man," as you allege.  I only knew what almost everyone else knew.  There was not a snowball's chance in hell that under our Constitution, Texas could tell 4 other states how to run their elections. 

2) Trump's lawyers scream and yell about voter fraud, but when they get to court, what they present is not a case of voter fraud.  Over and over, they have admitted in court that they are not presenting a case of voter fraud.  

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no...nce-fraud/

3) Judges don't call evidentiary hearings unless you can show that you have some evidence to enter into the record.  Failing that, the judge will not bother to call an evidentiary hearing.  In these cases, judge after judge has excoriated Trump's lawyers for lack of evidence.  There was no evidentiary hearing because there was no evidence presented to the judge to persuade him or her to go forward with the case.  

4) As for your last paragraph, that speaks for itself.

---

Them Proud Boys are TRUE Americans.

---

It's the lack of evidentiary hearings that bothers me, but that really falls on the states more than the courts. I knew Trump was going to have an uphill battle. I knew that courts were going to be reluctant to accept these cases, and I have said that here multiple times. I had a strong feeling the Supreme Court would reject this case. However, considering the nature of this election, the anomalies that took place, and the fact that we are using more of the least secure method of voting (absentee ballots), I expected more states to thoroughly audit the ballots. Where states were unwilling to do this, I had hoped the courts would consider it. This, at the very least, reduces some of the mistrust in our current system. Transparency is important.

I believe democrats cheated. No one who holds power cares enough to do anything about it.

I think what a lot of Trump supporters might be missing is that what Trump attorneys say outside of court and what they say in court are two different things.  They make a lot of allegations, but when they actually get to court, they are much more guarded in terms of what they allege.  Outside of court, they scream about voter fraud.  In court, when they are questioned by judges, they have been forced to admit they aren't alleging voter fraud because they don't have evidence of it.  

This is why there haven't been evidentiary hearings.   A judge says, "You're making this charge, what evidence would you present?"  And time after time after hearing the answer to that question, the judge has said, "You don't have enough evidence to bring a case."  

Donald Trump And His Lawyers Are Making Sweeping Allegations of Voter Fraud In Public. In Court, They Say No Such Thing

---

I can't take you seriously when you say "everyone with half a brain knew this case would be refused on those grounds". It's like you're playing the role of a smart man by using the power of hindsight. Yeah okay dude.

Also you mention "If that was true, it would have been presented in court.  Fifty court cases, no evidence presented. "

This demonstrates your lack of understanding as well. I guess I shouldn't be surprise because you hold opinions that are wildly outside the realms of reality. No evidence has been presented because no court case has been allowed to go to evidentiary hearings. Every judge keeps punting the case, either due to political bias or the judge getting death threats.

The "uprising" would take place with Trump declaring Martial Law and issuing FISA Warrants. His supporters will ensure he's successful by showing enough public support. If not, then they will start dragging politicians out into the streets and well, you can get creative after that. That's what a successful uprising would look like.

1) If you did not know that the Supreme Court would slam the door on that case, then your sources of information are severely lacking.  Almost everyone under the sun knew that was going to happen.  So I'm not playing the role of the "smart man," as you allege.  I only knew what almost everyone else knew.  There was not a snowball's chance in hell that under our Constitution, Texas could tell 4 other states how to run their elections. 

2) Trump's lawyers scream and yell about voter fraud, but when they get to court, what they present is not a case of voter fraud.  Over and over, they have admitted in court that they are not presenting a case of voter fraud.  They make allegations in public that they don't present in court.  

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no...nce-fraud/

3) Judges don't call evidentiary hearings unless you can show that you have some evidence to enter into the record.  Failing that, the judge will not bother to call an evidentiary hearing.  In these cases, judge after judge has excoriated Trump's lawyers for lack of evidence.  There was no evidentiary hearing because there was no evidence presented to the judge to persuade him or her to go forward with the case.  

4) As for your last paragraph, that speaks for itself.

---

https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...5463188482


https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...9682915328

---

MSM starting to report on Hunter Biden. The plan to get Kamala in as POTUS is running ahead of schedule.

---

MSM starting to report on Hunter Biden. The plan to get Kamala in as POTUS is running ahead of schedule.

They couldn't spike it any longer. 

This won't force Biden out. Dr. Jill will snatch Harris bald-headed if she even looks like she wants to sit in the Oval Office. 

The MSM is giving the story token coverage because they can't hide it any more. If it does grow legs, the dems will be more than happy to sacrifice Swalwell to prove their willingness to address the Chinese connection.

---

1) If you did not know that the Supreme Court would slam the door on that case, then your sources of information are severely lacking.  Almost everyone under the sun knew that was going to happen.  So I'm not playing the role of the "smart man," as you allege.  I only knew what almost everyone else knew.  There was not a snowball's chance in hell that under our Constitution, Texas could tell 4 other states how to run their elections. 

2) Trump's lawyers scream and yell about voter fraud, but when they get to court, what they present is not a case of voter fraud.  Over and over, they have admitted in court that they are not presenting a case of voter fraud.  They make allegations in public that they don't present in court.  

https://time.com/5914377/donald-trump-no...nce-fraud/

3) Judges don't call evidentiary hearings unless you can show that you have some evidence to enter into the record.  Failing that, the judge will not bother to call an evidentiary hearing.  In these cases, judge after judge has excoriated Trump's lawyers for lack of evidence.  There was no evidentiary hearing because there was no evidence presented to the judge to persuade him or her to go forward with the case.  

4) As for your last paragraph, that speaks for itself.

---

https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...5463188482


https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...9682915328

That is absolute nonsense.  

1) Dominion voting machines are used all over the country.  If they generated "an enormous amount of errors" as that guy alleges, no one would have bought them.  Dominion has been doing this since 2003.  Why has no one complained about the "enormous amount of errors" until now?  And if they generate an enormous amount of errors, when why did the hand recount in Georgia show that the machine count was correct?    

2) Even if that were true, that they generate a lot of errors, he then leaps to the conclusion that they were intentionally designed that way.  What evidence does anyone have of that?  

3) Even if they were intentionally designed that way, he still isn't actually alleging fraud.  He's saying it presents an opportunity for fraud.  That is not evidence of fraud.  

I call total BS on that tweet.

---

https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...5463188482


https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...9682915328

That is absolute nonsense.  

1) Dominion voting machines are used all over the country.  If they generated "an enormous amount of errors" as that guy alleges, no one would have bought them.  Dominion has been doing this since 2003.  Why has no one complained about the "enormous amount of errors" until now?  And if they generate an enormous amount of errors, when why did the hand recount in Georgia show that the machine count was correct?    

2) Even if that were true, that they generate a lot of errors, he then leaps to the conclusion that they were intentionally designed that way.  What evidence does anyone have of that?  

3) Even if they were intentionally designed that way, he still isn't actually alleging fraud.  He's saying it presents an opportunity for fraud.  That is not evidence of fraud.  

I call total BS on that tweet.

But he saw it on the Internet! IT HAS TO BE TRUE!

---

Here's what Dominion has to say about all this crap:

https://www.dominionvoting.com/election2...-straight/

DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS HAS BEEN THE TARGET OF ELECTION DISINFORMATION SEEKING TO UNDERMINE CONFIDENCE IN THE INTEGRITY OF THE 2020 ELECTION.  HERE ARE THE FACTS:

Dominion is a private American company that provides voting systems in 28 states, including "red" and "blue" jurisdictions.  Since its founding in 2003, Dominion has supported tens of thousands of elections in non-partisan fashion.

All Dominion systems are capable of producing paper records and are 100% auditable, with testing, reviews, audits, and recounts subject to oversight and verification by all political parties.

All 2020 election audits and recounts using Dominion technology have validated the accuracy and reliability of results, confirming the integrity of election outcomes.

Baseless claims about the integrity of the system or the accuracy of the results have been dismissed by election authorities, subject matter experts and third-party fact-checkers.

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS ARE ACCURATE AND SECURE?


All U.S. voting systems must provide assurance that they work accurately and reliably as intended under federal and state certification and testing requirements. In addition to multiple layers of testing and certification, as well as chain of custody controls, all Dominion systems use paper ballots or paper records for auditing. An unsubstantiated claim about the deletion of 2.7 million pro-Trump votes that was posted to the Internet and spread online has been taken down and debunked by fact-checkers.



The U.S. Department of Justice has found no evidence of widespread voter fraud. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) confirmed the 2020 election was "the most secure in American history," adding, "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised."



IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE OF DOMINION SYSTEMS VOTE SWITCHING OR SOFTWARE ERRORS?


No, all baseless claims have been debunked by election officials, subject matter experts and third-party fact checkers. No evidence whatsoever has been offered to support claims that there was a systemic problem with vote-counting machines. A hand recount of all paper ballots in the State of Georgia completed on November 19 verified that machine vote totals were reliable and accurate. Certified results in Arizona, Georgia, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, plus other states all validate the accuracy of official tallies.

---

Did you READ the attached report? I didn't "see it on the internet" you guys are hopeless. I swear.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCenojrUwVM

---

That is absolute nonsense.  

1) Dominion voting machines are used all over the country.  If they generated "an enormous amount of errors" as that guy alleges, no one would have bought them.  Dominion has been doing this since 2003.  Why has no one complained about the "enormous amount of errors" until now?  And if they generate an enormous amount of errors, when why did the hand recount in Georgia show that the machine count was correct?    

2) Even if that were true, that they generate a lot of errors, he then leaps to the conclusion that they were intentionally designed that way.  What evidence does anyone have of that?  

3) Even if they were intentionally designed that way, he still isn't actually alleging fraud.  He's saying it presents an opportunity for fraud.  That is not evidence of fraud.  

I call total BS on that tweet.

But he saw it on the Internet! IT HAS TO BE TRUE!

Are you even aware of what that report is? Of course not, because you didn't read it. It was the court ordered forensic audit that was initially gag ordered but released today.

---

Did you READ the attached report? I didn't "see it on the internet" you guys are hopeless. I swear.

---

Dude, it's over. Let go.

---

Did you READ the attached report? I didn't "see it on the internet" you guys are hopeless. I swear.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCenojrUwVM

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/20...92656be5a4

No, Atlanta Didn’t Count Illegal Ballots In Secret (Or In Suitcases)

"In reality, the video doesn’t appear to show fraud and is not even particularly suspicious: The supposed “suitcases” were actually normal, unexciting ballot containers, an investigator for the Georgia Secretary of State told fact-checking site Lead Stories, and state officials who reviewed the tape have said it showed standard processing of ballots."

[font=Georgia, Cambria,]“Nothing we have learned from the independent monitor or our investigation have suggested any improper ballots were scanned,” the Georgia Secretary of State’s office said in a statement to Forbes."[/font]

---

https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...5463188482


https://twitter.com/IvanPentchoukov/stat...9682915328

That is absolute nonsense.  

1) Dominion voting machines are used all over the country.  If they generated "an enormous amount of errors" as that guy alleges, no one would have bought them.  Dominion has been doing this since 2003.  Why has no one complained about the "enormous amount of errors" until now?  And if they generate an enormous amount of errors, when why did the hand recount in Georgia show that the machine count was correct?    

2) Even if that were true, that they generate a lot of errors, he then leaps to the conclusion that they were intentionally designed that way.  What evidence does anyone have of that?  

3) Even if they were intentionally designed that way, he still isn't actually alleging fraud.  He's saying it presents an opportunity for fraud.  That is not evidence of fraud.  

I call total BS on that tweet.

Nonsense? How is it nonsense? Because you say so? Did you read the report? No?

1) Yes. Texas didn't, even provided a 70 page report about why noone else should either. But I guess when the Governor of GA was bribed money to put it in his state, it's hard to say no. BTW there's financial links proving this as well. Not a leap to think the same thing could have happened in other states.

2) If that is true (hint: it is, I literally linked you the proof). Then it far surpasses the federally mandated error acceptance rate. Nothing else matters at that point, full stop.

3) The opportunity to commit fraud, combined with the mountains of other evidence that you no doubt ignore, is indeed EVIDENCE for fraud.

---

That is absolute nonsense.  

1) Dominion voting machines are used all over the country.  If they generated "an enormous amount of errors" as that guy alleges, no one would have bought them.  Dominion has been doing this since 2003.  Why has no one complained about the "enormous amount of errors" until now?  And if they generate an enormous amount of errors, when why did the hand recount in Georgia show that the machine count was correct?    

2) Even if that were true, that they generate a lot of errors, he then leaps to the conclusion that they were intentionally designed that way.  What evidence does anyone have of that?  

3) Even if they were intentionally designed that way, he still isn't actually alleging fraud.  He's saying it presents an opportunity for fraud.  That is not evidence of fraud.  

I call total BS on that tweet.

Nonsense? How is it nonsense? Because you say so? Did you read the report? No?

1) Yes. Texas didn't, even provided a 70 page report about why noone else should either. But I guess when the Governor of GA was bribed money to put it in his state, it's hard to say no. BTW there's financial links proving this as well. Not a leap to think the same thing could have happened in other states.

2) If that is true (hint: it is, I literally linked you the proof). Then it far surpasses the federally mandated error acceptance rate. Nothing else matters at that point, full stop.

3) The opportunity to commit fraud, combined with the mountains of other evidence that you no doubt ignore, is indeed EVIDENCE for fraud.

https://www.dominionvoting.com/election2...-straight/

---

Did you READ the attached report? I didn't "see it on the internet" you guys are hopeless. I swear.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCenojrUwVM

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/20...92656be5a4

No, Atlanta Didn’t Count Illegal Ballots In Secret (Or In Suitcases)

"In reality, the video doesn’t appear to show fraud and is not even particularly suspicious: The supposed “suitcases” were actually normal, unexciting ballot containers, an investigator for the Georgia Secretary of State told fact-checking site Lead Stories, and state officials who reviewed the tape have said it showed standard processing of ballots."

[font=Georgia, Cambria,]“Nothing we have learned from the independent monitor or our investigation have suggested any improper ballots were scanned,” the Georgia Secretary of State’s office said in a statement to Forbes."[/font]

Wow, Forbes really? That's where we're at on this site? Man you guys are going to be in for a rude awakening.

Look, the poll workers told everyone they were done counting for the night, the watchers and the media left. After they left they pulled out more ballots and on video scanned them, some batches multiple times. There is video evidence and testimonial evidence to this effect. Your Forbes article is disingenuous.

Forbes: Noone was told to leave, they were just told they were done counting for the day. The ballots under the table hidden from view weren't in suitcases, they were in ballot boxes. This claim has been DEBUNKED.

---

Nonsense? How is it nonsense? Because you say so? Did you read the report? No?

1) Yes. Texas didn't, even provided a 70 page report about why noone else should either. But I guess when the Governor of GA was bribed money to put it in his state, it's hard to say no. BTW there's financial links proving this as well. Not a leap to think the same thing could have happened in other states.

2) If that is true (hint: it is, I literally linked you the proof). Then it far surpasses the federally mandated error acceptance rate. Nothing else matters at that point, full stop.

3) The opportunity to commit fraud, combined with the mountains of other evidence that you no doubt ignore, is indeed EVIDENCE for fraud.

https://www.dominionvoting.com/election2...-straight/

Gee thanks bud. I'm really happy that the Shadow Company that up and closed 6 offices overnight, refused to file any sort of defamation lawsuit or show up to any post-election hearings, bribed political officials to install their voting machines in their districts and who's CEO who was openly bragging on Twitter as to how he had this election "under control" and called for violence against the sitting POTUS, who has also gone mysteriously missing the past 2 months are telling us there's nothing to see here and we can all go home despite actual evidence telling us otherwise.

---

Did you READ the attached report? I didn't "see it on the internet" you guys are hopeless. I swear.

---

Dude, it's over. Let go.

Is that what the news told you?

---

Wait. We are in for a rude awakening?

Hahahahaha

My man. Stay off the Internet for a while. I think it’ll do you some good.

---

It's the lack of evidentiary hearings that bothers me, but that really falls on the states more than the courts. I knew Trump was going to have an uphill battle. I knew that courts were going to be reluctant to accept these cases, and I have said that here multiple times. I had a strong feeling the Supreme Court would reject this case. However, considering the nature of this election, the anomalies that took place, and the fact that we are using more of the least secure method of voting (absentee ballots), I expected more states to thoroughly audit the ballots. Where states were unwilling to do this, I had hoped the courts would consider it. This, at the very least, reduces some of the mistrust in our current system. Transparency is important.

I believe democrats cheated. No one who holds power cares enough to do anything about it.

I think what a lot of Trump supporters might be missing is that what Trump attorneys say outside of court and what they say in court are two different things.  They make a lot of allegations, but when they actually get to court, they are much more guarded in terms of what they allege.  Outside of court, they scream about voter fraud.  In court, when they are questioned by judges, they have been forced to admit they aren't alleging voter fraud because they don't have evidence of it.  

This is why there haven't been evidentiary hearings.   A judge says, "You're making this charge, what evidence would you present?"  And time after time after hearing the answer to that question, the judge has said, "You don't have enough evidence to bring a case."  

Donald Trump And His Lawyers Are Making Sweeping Allegations of Voter Fraud In Public. In Court, They Say No Such Thing

Keep in mind, I am not a Trump supporter. I am anti-progressive. 

I have watched several of the court hearings, and most of the congressional hearings. Sidney Powell, for example, asked the judge for 5 days to examine dominion voting machines and was denied. You can not get the kind of evidence required without a proper investigation, and, if the states won't authorize it, it won't be done. I understand why the courts are making the choices that they are making, but you are using that to conclude that fraud did not occur, which is incorrect. We have evidence that irregularities occurred, but the powers that be are choosing not to do a rigorous search.

---