• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Joe Biden Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
4,084
3,104
Midwest
✟373,906.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Proof that “state courts barely even looked at the evidence at all.” Have you examined all the pleadings in every one of these cases? Have you looked at the transcripts?
Not personally, but I’ve heard enough from the Trump team/lawyers, eyewitnesses, and video accounts to be convinced this whole thing stinks to high heaven! I also watched the numbers change drastically over night in critical states. It’s no accident the liberal news media did their best to slander Trump for the last 4 years and the Democrats sought to get him impeached. He is not on board with their global plans.
 
Upvote 0

Postvieww

Believer
Sep 29, 2014
7,156
2,692
South
✟187,815.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No, I'm looking at what is there. So are the courts. That's why they have thrown out almost every one of Trump's cases.
If you had been watching the senate hearing you would have learned most cases were thrown out for procedural reasons not lack of fraud evidence per Ken Starr.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,439
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟617,196.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Not personally, but I’ve heard enough from the Trump team/lawyers, eyewitnesses, and video accounts to be convinced this whole thing stinks to high heaven! I also watched the numbers change drastically over night in critical states. It’s no accident the liberal news media did their best to slander Trump for the last 4 years and the Democrats sought to get him impeached. He is not on board with their global plans.
Ah yes, the Trump team/lawyers. Completely unbiased sources.
 
Upvote 0

Danthemailman

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2017
4,084
3,104
Midwest
✟373,906.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ah yes, the Trump team/lawyers. Completely unbiased sources.
I will take the word of them and the word of eyewitnesses and video accounts over the liberal news media any day.
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,298
59
Michigan
✟181,116.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
All courts are not interested in the constitution. Judges and lawyers have been threatened.
Evidence?


Some cases have been dismissed without hearing evidence.
what cases?

Name them.

Supreme Court dismissed on standing didn’t even hear evidence.
The case presented to the Supreme Court wasn't about evidence it was about an attempt to invalidate millions of votes.

One court said they filed too late.
name the case

Liberal judges have put their agenda over their sworn oath. How many reasons does anyone need to know many courts are not the bastions of justice they are supposed to be.
by liberal judges you mean ones' that actually follow the law....shame on them.

IMO these cries of “if there is evidence why don’t the courts agree” is a lazy smoke screen to cover for a real answer to the hundreds of sworn affidavits from concerned patriots. Who have in many cases risk their own safety, lively hoods an lives to tell the truth about this election. We have far too many too lazy to do real research on facts liberals screaming no evidence and when evidence is given they don’t have time to do research they want to be spoon fed details they will not believe anyway. This thread has become as corrupt as this election. That is my opinion of course, while I still have the right to express it.
and everyone else has the right to express that your opinion is divorced from the truth
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,298
59
Michigan
✟181,116.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
If people are going always to recite that same line ("There is no evidence") that the Harris-Biden campaign wants said, there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion on this topic.
If people are going always to recite that same line ("we don't need to support claims with actual evidence") that Trump wants said, there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion on this topic
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
If people are going always to recite that same line ("we don't need to support claims with actual evidence") that Trump wants said, there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion on this topic
The difference is that people do NOT commonly say that. Yes, it probably was fun to mock what I wrote. Yes, I get that. Ho Hum.

But they DO say what I commented on--and they have done it a lot.

You can see that on these forums alone where it must have been written a dozen times lately just on the forums I have been reading, not to mention any of the others.
 
Upvote 0

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,359
3,298
59
Michigan
✟181,116.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
That's what I'm saying. No court has asked anyone to show a machine changing votes. Even though now it has been shown to have happened. There is a LOT of investigation yet to do on this. It's far too difficult to get this done in a timely fashion. We'll see if there is ever a court that will take this on. I doubt there will be.

A Georgia Dominion voting machine has been obtained, shows clear evidence of flipping Trump votes to Biden - Patriot Rising

And it doesn't matter how many votes were flipped in one county. What matters is, how many machines did this and where. This will be extremely difficult to find out. And difficult to get a court ruling on.
the big problem with Garland Favonito's claim....aside from the fact that just how he was able to obtain a voting machine is that he was making the same claims about vote flipping before he supposedly got hold of this stray voting machine.



and here is a debunking of Favonito's claim
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,439
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟617,196.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The difference is that people do NOT commonly say that. Yes, it probably was fun to mock what I wrote. Yes, I get that. Ho Hum.

But they DO say what I commented on--and they have done it a lot.

You can see that on these forums alone where it must have been written a dozen times lately just on the forums I have been reading, not to mention any of the others.

The difference between "there is no evidence" and "we don't need to support claims with actual evidence" is that in a court of law you must support your claims with evidence. The Trump lawyers have not done that.
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,439
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟617,196.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I will take the word of them and the word of eyewitnesses and video accounts over the liberal news media any day.
And if all these eyewitnesses exist, why isn't the evidence being presented in court?
 
Upvote 0

Postvieww

Believer
Sep 29, 2014
7,156
2,692
South
✟187,815.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If people are going always to recite that same line ("we don't need to support claims with actual evidence") that Trump wants said, there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion on this topic
As long as eye witness testimony is not considered to be evidence there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: rjs330
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
He did not.

Or, am I just not understanding the mindset I'm up against that translates any comment that isn't in agreement with the liberal POV as meaning whatever the latter want it to mean? Seriously, I have witnessed that often, so it could be true here as well.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
As long as eye witness testimony is not considered to be evidence there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion.

True, and yet THAT, particularly when signed and witnessed under oath and under penalty of law, is what we're talking about here. That absolutely IS "evidence."
 
Upvote 0

Postvieww

Believer
Sep 29, 2014
7,156
2,692
South
✟187,815.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
True, and yet THAT, particularly when signed and witnessed under oath and under penalty of law, is what we're talking about here. That absolutely IS "evidence."
I agree and based on that all claims of no evidence are without merit.
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Does this mean we are going to be a socialist country and or a communist country?
No, not a chance, if by 'socialism' you mean the normal definition: "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated [*] by the community as a whole."
[*]'regulated':here seems to mean: totally controlled, since just ordinary laws are already a basic level of regulation to begin with, and always present]

There's about a 0% chance of general state nationalization of industries, and also a 0% chance to move from just the typical regulation of typical law we are used to -- how things are today -- to a very different situation of total control, though regulation can increase (but mere increase in regulation is far short of total control; total control for instance would be that a steel mill is told how much to produce and who to sell or give it to, at what price, who they can or can't hire, how many rail cars to own, everything, a-z).

Why is it impossible?


Because in the U.S. the Constitution rules (as we have just witnessed vis a vis the election, where courts followed law instead of following politicians like Trump). So, law rules and also Congress has to make the law...

In the U.S. a president doesn't make the law, Congress does.



 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And I thought churches supported Donald Trump? I am shocked that there were churches that were for Biden.
Biden follows more of what Christ said than Trump does, objectively.

But that doesn't prove either one believes or is even Christian.

But, at least for Biden, we know as a fact that he goes to mass (Catholic church services).

I can't say whether Trump goes to church so often, in such a habitual way as it seems Biden has been doing (at least lately). I've heard Trump doesn't, but there is more than one way to have church. Perhaps Trump could let us know whether he goes to church in any fashion.
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,439
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟617,196.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
As long as eye witness testimony is not considered to be evidence there is no possibility of a meaningful discussion.
Eyewitness testimony is considered to be evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,439
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟617,196.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
True, and yet THAT, particularly when signed and witnessed under oath and under penalty of law, is what we're talking about here. That absolutely IS "evidence."
Are the witnesses willing to appear and testify in court? People who supply affidavits are rarely prosecuted for perjury, but someone who takes the stand and lies will most probably face such charges.

"By definition, an affidavit is “a sworn statement in writing made under oath or on affirmation before a person authorized to do so under the law.” But as Detroit attorney David Ayyash says -- that doesn’t mean they are accurate.

“In a lawsuit, if a witness offers sworn testimony, that is considered evidence. But the finder of fact, usually a jury -- but sometimes a judge -- determines the credibility of that evidence,” Ayyash said. “So technically - yes - an affidavit is a form of evidence, but that doesn’t mean it’s credible.”

"The judge presiding over the case will also determine the admissibility of an affidavit. One reason an affidavit may be inadmissible is due to the inclusion of hearsay. Many of the affiants in Trump lawsuits submitted affidavits alleging they heard someone say there was fraud, but didn’t have a first-hand account. In most cases, with some exceptions of course, hearsay is not admissible in court."

"Lying in an affidavit is a violation of law and a person who is caught lying could face perjury charges. But it’s a bit more complicated."

"Affidavits that contain vague or second-hand accounts may be hard to prove as false. There are also many scenarios where a witness just misunderstands the situation or is mistaken in what they believe they heard or saw."

"For instance, in the Trump vs. Wayne County case cited above, Judge Kenny wrote in his ruling, “Plaintiffs’ affiants did not have full understanding of TCF absent ballot tabulation.” He said if plaintiffs’ affiants would have participated in pre-election training sessions, they would have had a better understanding of the process. Many claims could be easily explained by election officials.
So technically - yes - if a person signs an affidavit with false information, they could be charged with perjury. But proving the person willfully lied can prove to be quite difficult in many cases."

The full article can be found here: Evidence? Hearsay? Voter fraud claims in affidavits, explained (clickondetroit.com)

And someone earlier said that none of the judges had actually looked at the affidavits. Well, this judge obviously did so those claims were false.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Site Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,340
9,285
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,223,341.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not personally, but I’ve heard enough from the Trump team/lawyers, eyewitnesses, and video accounts to be convinced this whole thing stinks to high heaven! I also watched the numbers change drastically over night in critical states. It’s no accident the liberal news media did their best to slander Trump for the last 4 years and the Democrats sought to get him impeached. He is not on board with their global plans.
Have you heard what judges Trump appointed said, when they saw lawsuit evidence?

Here's an example:

“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy,” Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump appointee, wrote. “Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”

Third Circuit Rejects Trump's Appeal in Broad Challenge to Pa. Election | The Legal Intelligencer

This isn't the only judge Trump or other republicans appointed that reached a similar conclusion.

Would you like to hear from more?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.