Lin Wood says Sidney Powell's lawsuit "speaks TRUTH" and will be filed tomorrow

[LostMarbels]

This resolution (if passed) would not nullify the electoral slate already set in Penn. It would only recommend and urge the governor (and congress) do do certain things.

The Governor is not over the senate. The Governor is not even over the Sheriff. The Sheriff is the only officer that can legally arrest the Gov.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

The senate version does seem to have more force, but it is still only a proposal.

It also has to pass on Monday or it dies because the 30th is the last day of the legislative session.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The state legislators just nullified that, and are seeking to take back their authority over the election.

Nope. They have not. Where did you get that crazy idea from? Ae you talking about the silly resolution? That has not even passed yet. It is doubtful if it will pass.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The Governor is not over the senate. The Governor is not even over the Sheriff. The Sheriff is the only officer that can legally arrest the Gov.

Why are we talking about "over" and arrests?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why are we talking about "over" and arrests?

Gots to arrest that immoral gubnor so that Trump can win.

 

[LostMarbels]

Why are we talking about "over" and arrests?

Pecking order. The State Senate is not under the Governors command. They do not have to entreat him for a thing.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Gots to arrest that immoral gubnor so that Trump can win.

So it is a coup then.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Peeking order. The State Senate is not under the Governors command. They do not have to entreat him for a thing.

I don't care what order they peek.

It's not an "under" thing at all. The resolution hasn't passed. (and it is questionable if the legislative power to set the manner of selecting electors permits them to select a new slate by resolution, and not by passing a new law.)

 

[LostMarbels]

I don't care what order they peek.

It's not an "under" thing at all. The resolution hasn't passed. (and it is questionable if the legislative power to set the manner of selecting electors permits them to select a new slate by resolution, and not by passing a new law.)

It is nothing more than delegation of authority. Or in this case being relinquished of your command by a Superior.

Constitutions are a thing... as well as enumerated powers.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It is nothing more than delegation of authority. Or in this case being relinquished of your command by a Superior.

Constitutions are a thing... as well as enumerated powers.

So who's the superior here, the sheriff?

 

[LostMarbels]

So who's the superior here, the sheriff?

I was simply stating that the Sheriff is an elected officer that the Governor can even be arrested by. The Gov is just one at the top of the food chain.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I was simply stating that the Sheriff is an elected officer that the Governor can even be arrested by. The Gov is just one at the top of the food chain.

Don't we have enough irrelevancy already?

 

[Kentonio]

I think more than half the nation will still believe it yes. As for me I'm still open to listening why in the midnight hours they suddenly stopped the count. Nothing about it seems credible to me.

Because we humans have this crazy little thing called a need for sleep. The votes aren’t being counted by robots, usually they’re counted by volunteers and it’s a tiring and tedious job. It’s also one that you don’t want people to mess up because they’re exhausted.

 

[KCfromNC]

But the other side think the Left is committing a coup.

If "the other side" is legitimately upset that someone other than their ordained candidate won a free and fair election and wants legislators to ignore that result by fiat, it says more about them than the people they're lashing out at.

 

[Zanting]

Please, in your own words, explain how the physical ballots matched the machine count.

Are massive numbers of people not looking at the physical ballots before submitting their votes?

It's very simple.

1. GA uses dominion voting machines extensively.
2. The machines print out a physical ballot that the voter can see.
3. Those physical ballots were counted by hand during the audit after the election.
4. That count matched the count given by the machines.
5. Ergo, the machines are not switching votes because it would be seen in the physical ballots being different.

Please point out of the above what is wrong or missing that would affect #5.

If one is truly interested in knowing or learning anything, they will search for themselves.

It's not up to me or anyone to provide you with anything you have no desire to find out for yourself.

 

[Zanting]

I've seen everything you consider to be 'proof', and it isn't proof; proof is not a subjective concept. There are things that are real, and things that aren't. Postal voting is a normal part of the election process in almost every developed country and no, it doesn't lead to 'massive fraud' as Giuliani claims. You'd be hard pressed to find any actual, real fraud from postal voting in recent decades, and certainly nothing significant. These are facts - no amount of engaging in online echo chambers changes anything in the real world, the changes only go on inside your own head.

Stop and think through what you are saying. Of course people who have been told repeatedly before the election even got started that there would be 'massive fraud', who have been coached to 'challenge anything' - without even knowing what it is they are challenging - and who are offered v generous financial incentives to find something somewhere that is fraudulent are going to complain. That is exactly what they have been trained to do. So what? What gives you the idea that allegation = reality?

Take something, anything, an actual instance of actual fraud and explain why you think it is actual fraud. 'Lots of people said so' or 'seems like something isn't right' are not proof of anything at all other than the effects of groupthink and the power of narratives. Demonstrate one case of actual fraud that can be proven - if you want some examples, the actual data from the WH identifies 1,071 cases of election fraud (all kinds of fraud, not just that related to mail voting) relating to a small number of votes from the last few decades. That gives you some actual cases of actual things that have actually happened in recent decades, not all of the info is accurate you can get a general idea. Then you can demonstrate how actual cases of fraud are essentially the same thing as lots of people repeating a lot of nonsense they don't even understand about how this or that standard procedure is an 'anomaly' or 'definitely an indicator of massive fraud' etc.

It doesn't matter what you believe is or is not evidence of election fraud, or what are true or false witness accounts, nor does it matter what I believe.

What matters is what the court determines is or is not evidence of election fraud based on the facts and that's all that matters.

I have no desire to waste any time trying to convince you, or anyone else of anything one way or another.

Facts after all are indeed stubborn things as John Addams so accurately pointed out.

 

[Zanting]

It's even better than that, really. Kemp and the others are being sued not personally, but in their official capacities as elected representatives of the people of Georgia.

The plaintiffs are suing to benefit Trump personally, not 'the office of president' or We The People.

Election fraud is always and only about the peoples voice being stolen and nothing more.

 

[Kentonio]

If one is truly interested in knowing or learning anything, they will search for themselves.

It's not up to me or anyone to provide you with anything you have no desire to find out for yourself.

You’re on the side that wants to radically override centuries of constitutional precedent and process. The onus is very much on you to justify that.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Election fraud is always and only about the peoples voice being stolen and nothing more.

Fortunately the US has a very robust and secure election system, making fraud a negligible problem.

 

[Tom 1]

What matters is what the court determines is or is not evidence of election fraud based on the facts and that's all that matters.

I have no desire to waste any time trying to convince you, or anyone else of anything one way or another.

If the court decisions are what matters, then there is nothing to be convinced of, as you say. So far, each court has dismissed every petition brought forward as having no merit - not just lacking in evidence but lacking in any kind of coherent allegation for which evidence would be needed. People giving 'signed testimony' that they saw something that ' wasn't right' or they couldn't get in to observe because the place was crowded, or because they saw a 'suspicious' pile of votes or a truck, or some other such thing, is only evidence of people expressing that they didn't know what was going on. This is hardly surprising as you had a large group of people already primed by Trump's twitter nonsense to believe the election would be rigged, and who were coached to 'challenge anything'.

None of the allegations is in any way something that ought to be taken seriously. There is nothing more in any of it than vague impressions of things people don't understand. Despite this being the case there is a belief that because lots of confused people were sent in to observe something they didn't understand and hence were even more confused at the end of it, then their confused accounts that 'something isn't right' must have some truth to them. There is no actual, real, reason to believe this. As you say, the courts will continue to look at what is presented, and tell the plaintives to come back if they ever come up with anything that can be called a real allegation of a real thing actually really happening.