SCOTUS has rejected the "Texas + 18 other states" lawsuit that's been described as Team Trump's "Hail Mary" to replace president elect Joe Biden with second term president Donald Trump.
It was a one-page response from SCOTUS: Texas has no standing in this matter. "It ain't any of yo' business, Mr Texas AG Ken Paxton."
I think I have that accurately, but even if I am off by a '0' more or less, it's plain to see that is a very very small fraction of 1.
That is part of the "Texas + 18" lawsuit that was just rejected by the Supreme Court.
It is (purportedly) the odds that Biden could go on to win the election from the status of the election at 3am on November 4, after the 24 hours of the official election day on November 3. The odds, if the election were fair and not a "steal" by the Democrats.
I wonder if that is going to be the subject of a letter or article in one or more of the professional journals that cover the field of statistics, like "The American Statistician" or "The Journal of the Royal Statistical Society." The Royal Statistical Society. At least that offers the objectivity of an organization that is based an entire ocean's distance from the United States.
?
Hey wait. I just realized, my number is way way way off. It should be what... 10-60. I think that's it. A zero, a decimal point, then 59 zeros, and finally a 1.
------------------ La revolución del 15 de agosto
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-12-2020).]
Despite what Trump has claimed, we’ve known the result of the election for over a month at this point. Anyone still wanting to bet that Trump hasn’t lost? I threw it out a few times, no bites.
Oh he lost. But not without cheating. Just check the signatures of the mail in ballots vs the signatures on file. It’s never going to happen. This stink will hang over Sniffer Joe until Kamala takes over.
Originally posted by rinselberg: Pick one. You can't go wrong.
75. Specifically, there were 1,305,659 absentee mail-in ballots submitted in Georgia in 2020. There were 4,786 absentee ballots rejected in 2020. This is a rejection rate of .37%. In contrast, in 2016, the 2016 rejection rate was 6.42% with 13,677 absentee mail-in ballots being rejected out of 213,033 submitted, which more than seventeen times greater than in 2020. See Cicchetti Decl. at ¶ 24, App. 7a.
Example: - More people voting in a district than there are actual registered voters. - People voting in two states - Dead people voting - Illegals voting (no ID check) - Exploited nursing home residents - Stolen votes (people voting in others names)
These are things that have always been baked in for the Democrats. It is an almost uniquely Democrat-issue 9 times out of 10. We can ask "why" but it has more to do with the mindset of a Democrat (the end justifies the means). All prior presidents have just accepted this and never bothered to fight it. It comes out after the fact, maybe a couple of people get arrested here and there when it's exceptionally egregious, but generally, this persists election after election.
With an election this close, why should we be expected to simply accept this and not fight it?
I just hope that after this is all over its not forgotten. So many times nothing is done.
After the inauguration, it will be announced that they investigated themselves and they are all choir boys. That is except for Hunter Biden. He will be slapped with a small fine for a minor tax infraction and Joe will announce that it would be in the best interest of the nation that he resign.
You think he will leave without a fight? He might just love being the President since he has been after it since the 80's. I think he will stay for awhile to get everything in place before he departs (willingly or unwillingly) then Kamala will be moved up and anointed the new Messiah to show we are not racist. Again. Elect Obama, not racist. Elect trump, racist! Now back to not racist.
You think he will leave without a fight? He might just love being the President since he has been after it since the 80's. I think he will stay for awhile to get everything in place before he departs (willingly or unwillingly) then Kamala will be moved up and anointed the new Messiah to show we are not racist. Again. Elect Obama, not racist. Elect trump, racist! Now back to not racist.
I think if I were Ol' Joe and they came to me and said "We can make this easy or we can make this hard", knowing what they have on him, I would probably fold.
Example: - More people voting in a district than there are actual registered voters. - People voting in two states - Dead people voting - Illegals voting (no ID check) - Exploited nursing home residents - Stolen votes (people voting in others names)
These are things that have always been baked in for the Democrats. It is an almost uniquely Democrat-issue 9 times out of 10. We can ask "why" but it has more to do with the mindset of a Democrat (the end justifies the means). All prior presidents have just accepted this and never bothered to fight it. It comes out after the fact, maybe a couple of people get arrested here and there when it's exceptionally egregious, but generally, this persists election after election.
With an election this close, why should we be expected to simply accept this and not fight it?
Can you provide the link for a single county in which #1 happened? (Before we address any of your other false claims)
In the meantime, the investigative hearings that Judge Davidson ordered where set to begin on September 27. Davidson ordered the investigation of the three counties because of their peculiar returns. For instance, Duval county saw 99.4% of itsballots go for LBJ!
During the investigation, county officials made it difficult to obtain poll tax records and tally sheets. Witnesses proved hard to come by, and much of the potential evidence had disappeared.(40) Also quite bizarre was the fact that the final 203 names on the Jim Wells County's "Box 13" tally sheet were in a different color of ink and in a different handwriting than the previous thousand on the sheet. Strangely, they were also all in alphabetical order, like someone had just gone down the poll tax sheet and copied names down. Of the 203, "last-minute" voters at "Box 13," only 11 were located and questioned. All said they had not even voted!(
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 12-13-2020).]
SCOTUS has rejected the "Texas + 18 other states" lawsuit
It was a one-page response from SCOTUS: Texas has no standing in this matter. "It ain't any of yo' business..."
Irresponsible of the court.
With the seriousness of it all, it would have been better had they taken it on, and countered each point, in the end justifying faith in the voting system.
I take it that you have proof that his claims are false.
So if I claim that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein held elephant-themed orgies on the far side of the moon, it would be up to you to prove otherwise? Cool!
I take it that you have proof that his claims are false.
EVERY court in the United States holds to the same concept of jurisprudence in all civil suits, that the claims of the plaintiff carry a rebuttable presumption of truth.
It is up to the defendant to provide the rebuttal in the form of EVIDENCE that the claim(s) are not true.
Ergo, even for the purpose of debate, your question is properly stated.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 12-14-2020).]
EVERY court in the United States holds to the same concept of jurisprudence in all civil suits, that the claims of the plaintiff carry a rebuttable presumption of truth.
It is up to the defendant to provide the rebuttal in the form of EVIDENCE that the claim(s) are not true.
Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein held elephant-themed orgies on the far side of the moon!
Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein held elephant-themed orgies on the far side of the moon!
Simply restating an unsupported claim does not make it true, nor does such a restatement create a rebuttable presumption of it's truth.
Another tenet of American jurisprudence is that a court of jurisdiction may, upon proper motion by the defendant or sua sponte by the court, DISMISS an unsupported claim.
Where is your EVIDENCE to support your claim?
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 12-15-2020).]
Georgia's governor has some reports of him trying to get a deal with China so this is why he is not looking into the voter fraud and powerful people like Mitch McConnel have tie's to china through his wife so there is many on both sides of the isle who hate Trump and want him out so they look the other way
First thing that came up... it's from 2016 because current news on election fraud is being wildly filtered and unreported by nearly all media sites. This was when it was still OK to tell the truth:
Which is hilarious, because all the other news articles... from literally the same news sites, all talk about Trump's "absurd" claims and how wildly inappropriate his claims are, and that this never would happen, blah blah... it's ridiculous. I mean, we literally have the very same news organizations contradicting themselves on the very same locations saying it would never happen, yet they literally have articles on their website that say it did previously. But it was OK when it was a liberal that was claiming it (Jill Stein) and seeking recourse. Open your eyes...
My grandmother was in a nursing home in her last few years because she had dementia. The nursing home workers exploited every mentally incapacitated resident in the home and voted for Obama. My grandmother fled Socialism in Argentina during the Peronista regime, the last thing she would have done is vote for a modern day Democrat. To that point, she couldn't even speak English anymore, and her Spanish was broken and flawed when she could actually carry a coherent thought, let alone sign her name on an absentee ballot.
You guys are not morons... you know EXACTLY that what I'm saying is true. Democrats are impassioned to do the things that they do, and that includes voter fraud because they believe the end justifies the means. You guys pretend it's not happening, but it's obvious you guys know as well as I do that this happens. You're not scoring points on an imaginary game by pretending it doesn't.
[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 12-15-2020).]
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Lol, really? This happens every single election cycle. Just do a search for "county had more votes than residents"
But make sure you use DuckDuckGo. Both Bing and Google are filtering out a lot...
Media censorship, silencing dissent... keeping the public in the dark.
Yes, Big Tech is controlling the narrative. And that's a problem. Like I mentioned before, they're the robber barons of the 21st century. They will keep doing this until somebody stops them. The federal gov't is probably the only entity powerful enough to do that. And we (the voters) decide who is in Congress. So it's our responsibility as voters to put people in office who will confront Big Tech.
More in line with the thread title: The election is now over. The Electoral College has voted. And we have a new President. I am not a fan of Biden. But unless Donald Trump has evidence that the Electoral College has been compromised, he should stop contesting the election. At this point, continuing to contest the election will just make him look like a griefer.
PS - Now us firearms owners can look forward to another 4 years of inflated prices and ammo shortages.
[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 12-15-2020).]
Still, it doesn't become official until the slate of electors has been accepted, and then Pence has to accept what that slate certifies. Pence is a nothing but a push-over so he is just rubber stamp.
If I were ambitious (and more skilled at the online images editing game) I would replace that man (federal district judge Emmet Sullivan) with Mitch McConnell (just congratulated "one" Joseph Robinette Biden Jr today for becoming the President Elect) or Mike Pence (who already knows.)
I STOLE that from another forum member's recent message. Is that a technical foul? Illegal procedure? A balk?
Whobody knows.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-15-2020).]
VS 
