Posted on 02/05/2021 5:10:58 AM PST by ConservativeStLouisGuy
If a tree falls in the forest....
But hey, we just have to listen to CatOwner and his troll friends about how this was all a losing proposition.
Who’s “Catowner”?
Mark for reference.
^ 45 ^
He lost because how lawyers couldn’t bring the evidence. And yeah-they never brought fraud evidence. Let that sink in and stop making excuses for it (like the article tries to do).
It's probably Karen's sister.
It’s not about winning court cases....it’s about draining Trumps wealth.
It’s not about winning court cases....it’s about draining Trumps wealth.
It doesn’t matter. It makes no difference how these lawsuits turn. The Biden/Pelosi/Schumer insurrection is complete with no action or remedies ordered by the courts.
> But hey, we just have to listen to CatOwner and his troll friends about how this was all a losing proposition. <
In the interest of keeping things balanced, it’s way too early to say this is not a losing proposition. A plaintive can win lawsuit after lawsuit. But if nothing changes, then those wins are just moral victories. And moral victories don’t pay the rent.
For example, suppose some judge somewhere rules that Dominion voting machines are inherently flawed. What will that matter if those machines are used again in 2022 and 2024?
I wish I could be more optimistic about this. But so much of the judiciary has shown themselves to be either Deep Staters or Deep State sympathizers. This is going to be a long, uphill battle.
Side note: Ottawa, please understand that a person can disagree with your point of view without being a troll, a communist, etc.
You are right. This story is deceptive. Almost all of the Trump “wins” are pre-election wins and have nothing to do with the election fraud that we are concerned with today.
Yeah. The article blows thru many paragraphs before even addressing the title subject, then claims dismissed/withdrawn cases don’t count (”this is stupid, get it out of my court” is a loss), claims adjudicated-but-appealed cases aren’t resolved (they are unless actually reversed), doesn’t differentiate between Trump’s own cases vs others on his behalf, then gets further squishy about what actually counts as a win.
I really have no idea how many serious cases Trump filed (vs frivolity by others), nor their outcome. Articles like this just muddy the issue further.
Bottom line: Joe is in the Oval Office, not Donald.
The inability of Trump’s “elite legal strikeforce” to present hard evidence of vote fraud is simply mind boggling, because it was everywhere and publicly available.
For instance..
- Video segments from major news networks (ABC, CNN, etc) showing Trump’s real-time vote count for different battleground states going DOWN, and Joe’s going up compared to the last update - by precisely the SAME NUMBER of votes. eg: Trump lost 5,278 votes over the prior update..and Joe gained 5,278 votes over the prior update..at the exact same time. Impossible, and pretty compelling evidence of vote count shenanigans (likely the machine algorithms at work, as has been widely speculated upon).
- Video of containers of ballots coming out from under the tables at the TCF Center, and being run through the counting machines multiple times in the dead of night, after all R poll watchers were sent home. (As most know, the R poll watchers were told counting was “done” for the night, yet it continued after they were told to leave). The “debunking experts” claim this is false, but the videos are (or were) publicly available and show clearly that it is factual.
- Voter rolls from AZ and elsewhere that conclusively show, beyond all doubt, that there are “anomalies” in who actually voted - in AZ’s case, beyond Joe’s margin of supposed victory. Those “anomoalies” include people who no longer live in AZ, dead people, people who voted more than 1 time, etc. A comprehensive list of these anomalies was presented and logged into the Congressional record during the start of the vote certification by an (R) Congressman and is irrefutable.
Why our “elite” legal team (and I say that with dripping sarcasm, as I personally think they were the worst possible legal team Trump could have chose) could not competently present ANY of that in a convincing way is beyond my ability to comprehend. IMHO, that’s a large part of why Trump “lost” the election. Had we had halfway decent legal experts running things, the outcome likely would have been quite different. (I get all the reasons Trump chose the people he did..but it doesn’t change whether or not they did a good job - they didn’t, in my strong opinion).
Good short analysis and advice about confirmation bias.
At the end of the day, despite the number of different states involved, there was amazingly no due process to challenge election fraud and state election law / constitutional violations, in real time. The other amazing thing was that our activist judiciary did not want to be activists. In a way, this all could have been predicted for Trump. He was warned in the debate and media that he will accept the results if he loses.
In the meantime, there is a Congressional seat in upstate NY that is still unseated as it works it way through the judicial system. All efforts seem to be made by judiciary to find a way to let the demonkkkrap win. Now that is due process!
>> who’s “CatOwner”
“Of the ones that are “TBD”-no-they are losses. They are appeals to the SCOTUS where they will also be losses. This is bunk.”
Hum. You may be correct, but it is still a bit of “prejudice” on your part to proclaim that has not happened will happen. (That is “downer” propaganda.)
Interesting. You joined on November 22, the anniversary of Kennedy’s assassination. (Always a depressing anniversary.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.