The DOG who caught the BUS

FreeSpeech1789 said:
Let's see the case names you stupid pos, you have the Pennsylvania Supreme Court which is literally made up of elected Democrats running as Democrats who ruled they had no standing because it was too late to file suit and you have the SCOTUS which claimed Texas had no standing to file suit, so like I said not a single court allowed the case to go past the preliminary stages let alone allowed evidence to be admitted. God you're dumb
Click to expand...

I gave them you paid pud pounder

You have nothing but the drool coming from the corners of your mouth



You are likely not even a human


Just some shitty Russian programmers failed Career results
 
In Pennsylvania


Stephanos Bibas, on behalf of the three-judge panel wrote: “Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so." It added: “Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."
 
evince said:
How do they think the can pack the court and then turn us back 50 years and keep marching for decades backwards like it’s going to hold up in nation that hates these ideas?


A planned dictatorship of right wing racist religious nutters
Click to expand...

I am so glad I took you off my ignore list. (you were the first). You continue to prove that you are in the top three nutcases on this forum and given your competition, that is saying something.
Congratulations.
 
evince said:
I gave them you paid pud pounder
Click to expand...

No you didn't you lying bitch the only two cases cited in your article were the SCOTUS ruling of no standing and the Federal Appeals Court Decision regarding a stay of Biden being declared the winner of Pennsylvania not a case of voter fraud or an unconstitutional election, in fact the only case in which evidence was actually allowed ruled that the election procedures in Pennsylvania were unconstitutional:


Pennsylvania Court Says State’s Mail Voting Law Is Unconstitutional


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/28/us/politics/pennsylvania-mail-voting-law-unconstitutional.html
 
Last edited:
evince said:
In Pennsylvania


Stephanos Bibas, on behalf of the three-judge panel wrote: “Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so." It added: “Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here."
Click to expand...

That was a case seeking a temporary injunction on declaring Biden the winner of Pennsylvania until the facts could be sorted out that was not a case regarding election fraud or the Constitutionality of the election you fucking retard, seriously read your own fucking article dipshit.
 
evince said:
Post 12 foreskin lips
Click to expand...

Now show us where in the article where evidence of election fraud or the Constitutionality of the election was allowed to be presented because the only two cases cited in thar article was the SCOTUS ruling of no standing and the Federal Appeals Court rejecting the Trump campaigns attempt to receive a temporary injunction on declaring Biden the winner. In fact the only case pertinent to the discussion ruled that the Pennsylvania election was in fact unconstitutional.

Pennsylvania Court Says State’s Mail Voting Law Is Unconstitutional


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/28/us/politics/pennsylvania-mail-voting-law-unconstitutional.html
 
FreeSpeech1789 said:
Now show us where in the article where evidence of election fraud or the Constitutionality of the election was allowed to be presented because the only two cases cited in thar article was the SCOTUS ruling of no standing and the Federal Appeals Court rejecting the Trump campaigns attempt to receive a temporary injunction on declaring Biden the winner. In fact the only case pertinent to the discussion ruled that the Pennsylvania election was in fact unconstitutional.

Pennsylvania Court Says State’s Mail Voting Law Is Unconstitutional


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/28/us/politics/pennsylvania-mail-voting-law-unconstitutional.html
Click to expand...



They didn’t offer any proof idiot


That is what their complaint was supposed to contain to get a favorable path forward



They had no proof to give


Their fault idiot
 
Lionfish said:
I am so glad I took you off my ignore list. (you were the first). You continue to prove that you are in the top three nutcases on this forum and given your competition, that is saying something.
Congratulations.
Click to expand...

See


Empty lame personal insults and not on shred of actual proof
 
FreeSpeech1789 said:
All dismissed without looking at evidence by claiming no standing as every example the present proves.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Care to bet on whether all 60 cases were dismissed due to lack of standing without looking at the evidence?

I'm willing to bet $1,000,000 against your $100.
In order for me to win, I only need to find one case not dismissed for lack of standing or one case where the judge rejected the evidence as not being compelling.
I would ask for $100 for every case that I find that meets that criteria but I doubt you have that much money.
 
FreeSpeech1789 said:
It's not a lie, what was the name of the case that wasn't dismissed during the preliminary hearing you stupid bitch?
Click to expand...

Just as an FYI. You just claimed the PA Supreme Court and SCOTUS each dismissed a case. Those courts do not hold preliminary hearings. Supreme Courts only hear appeals. So you clearly have the answer to your question since you have provided what you claim is 2 cases that were appealed to higher courts.
 
It’s just a lie bot



The right just repeats lies they know are lies


Because the Republican base is so stupid they believe anything without checking them against the facts
 
FreeSpeech1789 said:
Now show us where in the article where evidence of election fraud or the Constitutionality of the election was allowed to be presented because the only two cases cited in thar article was the SCOTUS ruling of no standing and the Federal Appeals Court rejecting the Trump campaigns attempt to receive a temporary injunction on declaring Biden the winner. In fact the only case pertinent to the discussion ruled that the Pennsylvania election was in fact unconstitutional.

Pennsylvania Court Says State’s Mail Voting Law Is Unconstitutional


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/28/us/politics/pennsylvania-mail-voting-law-unconstitutional.html
Click to expand...

ah, I see someone beat me too it.....okay you can do this one first, then deal with the WI case......
 
evince said:
They didn’t offer any proof idiot


That is what their complaint was supposed to contain to get a favorable path forward



They had no proof to give


Their fault idiot
Click to expand...

the judge disagreed with you.......he found the election to be unconstitutional......based on the evidence.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top