Joe Biden is now POTUS

57da53ec09cbabf3c3e7c9e138512b99.png
 
Why did the lawyers quit the Trump lawsuit in Penn over the election?

Probably because their law licenses mean more to them than Trump’s money.

It appears that the lawyers were pretty much on the verge of the judge filing a complaint with the state bar for either bringing a frivolous suit (one that can’t succeed), bringing a vexatious suit (one designed to make life difficult for people) or misleading the court.

It appears the suit was brought to show systemic problems in counting mail-in ballots. For this purpose, the lawyers leaped on a few hundred ballots where the “outer envelope” wasn’t properly prepared. From the pleadings, it appeared the Trump campaign was claiming someone was trying to get in faked ballots. That would be a serious issue that deserved the courts attention.

However, when the evidence came out, it turned out:
  1. That most of the outer envelopes in question had technical deficiencies. For example, you’re supposed to put your current address on one side of the envelope, and on some of them the address was on the wrong side.
  2. The people counting the votes had noted these deficiencies and had put the ballots aside as non-compliant. They weren’t going to count them because they weren’t properly filled out.
So the judge asked “where’s the beef”. It was at that point that the lawyers admitted that the deficiencies were “technical” and not “fraudulent” and that the voters who sent in the ballots and the people counting them were all acting in good faith.

That’s when the judge lost it. It’s not uncommon in close races for one party to bring suit to count deficient mail in ballots (it happened in Florida in 2000 when the margin was close and every ballot mattered). However, that wasn’t what the Trump campaign was asking for. They were trying to prove systemic problems in the voting process that just weren’t there.
 
Pelosi is in the house, not the Senate. In the Senate the dems can't block anything.
This is false.

There has to be a 60% affirmative vote to get a bill started on the floor for debate. The Dems blocked it. Our government is set up so that no one party has all of the power. This is an example of this.

C'mon, we know that's not as exclusive as we would like. She put out a directive to not proceed with a debate in the Senate. This is fact.

Even if you want to pretend that it didn't happen, there is still no excuse for the democratic senators to refuse to discuss the Senate police reform bill.

So, here we are 6 months later, and absolutely nothing has been done by congress regarding police reform. The racist in charge is actually the only one who did anything, which is crazy!!!!

My point being that partisan politics hinders progress and both sides play this stupid game where black people always lose.
 
Why did the lawyers quit the Trump lawsuit in Penn over the election?
Probably because their law licenses mean more to them than Trump’s money.

It appears that the lawyers were pretty much on the verge of the judge filing a complaint with the state bar for either bringing a frivolous suit (one that can’t succeed), bringing a vexatious suit (one designed to make life difficult for people) or misleading the court.

It appears the suit was brought to show systemic problems in counting mail-in ballots. For this purpose, the lawyers leaped on a few hundred ballots where the “outer envelope” wasn’t properly prepared. From the pleadings, it appeared the Trump campaign was claiming someone was trying to get in faked ballots. That would be a serious issue that deserved the courts attention.

However, when the evidence came out, it turned out:
  1. That most of the outer envelopes in question had technical deficiencies. For example, you’re supposed to put your current address on one side of the envelope, and on some of them the address was on the wrong side.
  2. The people counting the votes had noted these deficiencies and had put the ballots aside as non-compliant. They weren’t going to count them because they weren’t properly filled out.
So the judge asked “where’s the beef”. It was at that point that the lawyers admitted that the deficiencies were “technical” and not “fraudulent” and that the voters who sent in the ballots and the people counting them were all acting in good faith.

That’s when the judge lost it. It’s not uncommon in close races for one party to bring suit to count deficient mail in ballots (it happened in Florida in 2000 when the margin was close and every ballot mattered). However, that wasn’t what the Trump campaign was asking for. They were trying to prove systemic problems in the voting process that just weren’t there.
Lying.

Lying lying fucking gotdamn lying

Man idk if I hate anything more than a liar.

I gotta quit lying to these hoes.
 
Why did the lawyers quit the Trump lawsuit in Penn over the election?
Probably because their law licenses mean more to them than Trump’s money.

It appears that the lawyers were pretty much on the verge of the judge filing a complaint with the state bar for either bringing a frivolous suit (one that can’t succeed), bringing a vexatious suit (one designed to make life difficult for people) or misleading the court.

It appears the suit was brought to show systemic problems in counting mail-in ballots. For this purpose, the lawyers leaped on a few hundred ballots where the “outer envelope” wasn’t properly prepared. From the pleadings, it appeared the Trump campaign was claiming someone was trying to get in faked ballots. That would be a serious issue that deserved the courts attention.

However, when the evidence came out, it turned out:
  1. That most of the outer envelopes in question had technical deficiencies. For example, you’re supposed to put your current address on one side of the envelope, and on some of them the address was on the wrong side.
  2. The people counting the votes had noted these deficiencies and had put the ballots aside as non-compliant. They weren’t going to count them because they weren’t properly filled out.
So the judge asked “where’s the beef”. It was at that point that the lawyers admitted that the deficiencies were “technical” and not “fraudulent” and that the voters who sent in the ballots and the people counting them were all acting in good faith.

That’s when the judge lost it. It’s not uncommon in close races for one party to bring suit to count deficient mail in ballots (it happened in Florida in 2000 when the margin was close and every ballot mattered). However, that wasn’t what the Trump campaign was asking for. They were trying to prove systemic problems in the voting process that just weren’t there.

Thats what i heard

Lawyers within the fears pissed off
 
What in thee fuck is wrong with those people bruh....lol
Them fuckers minds must been compromised by harp or something.
What's so funny about this is that they claimed this would be the democrats, etc....when Republicans win in a landslide.
Yes people only focus on the dems saying or feeling there was going to be a blue wave but Republicans were talking about a red wave that would have us acting like they are now.
:lol: :lol:

"We don't cry like dems, we just accept the loss and move on"

:roflmao3::roflmao3:
 
Last edited:
Why did the lawyers quit the Trump lawsuit in Penn over the election?
Probably because their law licenses mean more to them than Trump’s money.

It appears that the lawyers were pretty much on the verge of the judge filing a complaint with the state bar for either bringing a frivolous suit (one that can’t succeed), bringing a vexatious suit (one designed to make life difficult for people) or misleading the court.

It appears the suit was brought to show systemic problems in counting mail-in ballots. For this purpose, the lawyers leaped on a few hundred ballots where the “outer envelope” wasn’t properly prepared. From the pleadings, it appeared the Trump campaign was claiming someone was trying to get in faked ballots. That would be a serious issue that deserved the courts attention.

However, when the evidence came out, it turned out:
  1. That most of the outer envelopes in question had technical deficiencies. For example, you’re supposed to put your current address on one side of the envelope, and on some of them the address was on the wrong side.
  2. The people counting the votes had noted these deficiencies and had put the ballots aside as non-compliant. They weren’t going to count them because they weren’t properly filled out.
So the judge asked “where’s the beef”. It was at that point that the lawyers admitted that the deficiencies were “technical” and not “fraudulent” and that the voters who sent in the ballots and the people counting them were all acting in good faith.

That’s when the judge lost it. It’s not uncommon in close races for one party to bring suit to count deficient mail in ballots (it happened in Florida in 2000 when the margin was close and every ballot mattered). However, that wasn’t what the Trump campaign was asking for. They were trying to prove systemic problems in the voting process that just weren’t there.
like when the Judge asked them if there republicans present in the room observing the count and the fucker says " there were non zero number of people"

The transcript from one of Trump’s legal challenges is fascinating. The judge trying to get to the bottom of whether they WERE allowed to have observers:

Judge : “Are your observers in the counting room?”

Trump lawyer: "There's a non-zero number of people in the room.

wtf? how many people does it take to get to a "non zero number of people" ?? :roflmao3: :roflmao3: :roflmao3:
 
Last edited:
Watching Trump live right now; dude looks and sounds like he’s been on a cocaine binge since last Tuesday.

EB19850728COMMENTARY498320721AR.jpg

I kid you not i've probably watch this clown speak in entirity maybe 3 times.

Once during the debates against Clinton and two other times during his presidency.

I'm still baffled that someone that's obviously beyond his wits is the POTUS.
Ol' Boy isn't even qualified to be a dog walker.

White, Rich(sorta), and Racist! Winning ticket.
 
I kid you not i've probably watch this clown speak in entirity maybe 3 times.

Once during the debates against Clinton and two other times during his presidency.

I'm still baffled that someone that's obviously beyond his wits is the POTUS.
Ol' Boy isn't even qualified to be a dog walker.

White, Rich(sorta), and Racist! Winning ticket.

He pimped the shit out of that White Supremacy. Man, the silly ass CACs would even let someone like Trump work on their farm if he came in talking crazy as fuck like he does live from the fucking White House.
 
I kid you not i've probably watch this clown speak in entirity maybe 3 times.

Once during the debates against Clinton and two other times during his presidency.


I'm still baffled that someone that's obvious beyond his wits is the POTUS of the US.

White, Rich(sorta) and Racist! Winning ticket.
It's called contrast. Obama was a high mark and American wanted (especially Republicans) wanted a dumbed down president. Just happens Trump made himself available (low water mark).

00-promo-trump-bday.jpg



I mean Alabama chose this dope as their new senator.



While speaking to The Alabama Daily News, the former Auburn football coach who unseated Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) last week said that he thinks “it is still up in the air who’s going to be the president,” adding that media outlets should have waited to declare a winner amid President Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of widespread voter fraud in several battleground states.

“The media has got to stand down on all of this because they’re creating so much havoc,” Tuberville said.

He then added, “I remember in 2000 Al Gore was president, United States, president elect, for 30 days – 30 days – and after 30 days, it got to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court says, no, George Bush is going to be the president.”

Gore was not projected as the winner of the presidential election in 2000 by any major networks, though several networks did incorrectly and prematurely declare him as he winner of Florida, the state that ended up being decisive in that election.

The networks then has to retract those projections, and several networks then prematurely declared Republican George W. Bush as the president-elect, before pulling that projection back as well.

At another point in the interview, Tuberville also incorrectly said that the three branches of the federal government are “ the House, the Senate and executive.”

As stated in the Constitution, the three branches of government are the legislative, which includes both the House and the Senate; the executive, composed of the presidency, as well as the Cabinet and executive departments; and judicial, which includes the Supreme Court.

While discussing his concerns that a Biden presidency could lead to “a socialist type of government,” Tuberville said “my dad fought 76 years ago in Europe to free Europe of socialism.”

World War II was a fight against fascism in Europe. Adolf Hitler’s fascist regime strongly opposed the state ownership of capital and egalitarian ideals of socialism, and also ordered the execution of those who supported socialism and communism.


The U.S. was allied in World War II with the Soviet Union, though the Soviets had initially agreed to a non-aggression pact with Hitler."
 
I've been posting this shit for years because I've been reading right-wing media. These muthafuckas think MSNBC and Fox News are the same now. They demand 100% fielty to Trump.
One of the people said when asked who does he listen to. He said Alex Jones. That tells you all you need to know. It's clear these folks like to suck on their thumb, cover up in a blanket, and take in nothing but ignorance. Anything else makes them feel unsecure and unsafe.
 
Back
Top