Uncured: Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Challenge In Pennsylvania

On Saturday, U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Brann dismissed the challenge filed by the Trump campaign to stop the certification of the vote in Pennsylvania. The court acknowledged that vote negation may have occurred due to different “curing” rules, but balked at the legal and logical basis for blocking certification of the state electoral votes to remedy to such claims. The scathing order described the argument of Trump counsel Rudy Giuliani as a “Frankenstein monster” composed of disparate parts of different legal claims. Notably, the court did find that the “Individual Plaintiffs have adequately pled that their votes were denied.” However, that island of support is lost in a vast ocean of countervailing and caustic findings by the court.

The court started its decision with a haymaker:

“This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.”

The court slammed the Trump campaign over standing and countervailing precedent.  It described the filing as a “Frankenstein’s Monster… haphazardly stitched together from two distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent.”

The Trump campaign is likely to argue on appeal that, while citing the absence of more systemic problems, the court was also denying the campaign access to information held by the state and election officials.

As the court acknowledged, the Trump campaign expressly accepted that aspects of its argument on standing were precluded by existing precedent but wanted to preserve the issue for appeal. On other issues, however, the court repeatedly slammed the campaign for “trying to mix-and-match claims to bypass contrary precedent.” It said that the effort was “not lost on the Court.”

Much of the most biting language was directed at the campaign standing claims. Yet, while the court hits the Trump campaign on its “competitive standing” theory, it also notes:

“To be clear, this Court is not holding that a political campaign can never establish standing to challenge the outcome of an election; rather, it merely finds that in this case, the Trump Campaign has not pled a cognizable theory.”

There are aspects of the opinion that could be challenged on appeal, the Court repeatedly comes back to the primary difficulty facing the campaign: the remedy. This is another “sticker shock” decision with a judge balking at the relief. The court emphasized the disconnect that it found between any violation and the requested relief. It rejects the notion that it should protect the votes of these individual votes by effectively disenfranchising millions of other voters by blocking certification. It is a “leveling down” approach that the Court find counterintuitive and unsupportable:

“When remedying an equal-protection violation, a court may either “level up” or “level down.”119 This means that a court may either extend a benefit to one that has been wrongfully denied it, thus leveling up and bringing that person on par with others who already enjoy the right, or a court may level down by withdrawing the benefit from those who currently possess it. Generally, “the preferred rule in a typical case is to extend favorable treatment” and to level up. In fact, leveling down is impermissible where the withdrawal of a benefit would necessarily violate the Constitution. Such would be the case if a court were to remedy discrimination by striking down a benefit that is constitutionally guaranteed.”

Despite the strong language of the opinion, it would be a mistake for Giuliani to continue to attack what he claims to be the bias of “Democratic judges.”  I have previously criticized President Trump for such attacks (though Democrats regularly level the same attacks at Republican appointees on the Supreme Court).  While he was appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Brann is a well-regarded jurist who happens to be a Republican (and long-standing member of the Federalist Society). One can disagree with elements in this decision but it is an overall view, particularly of the relief, that would be shared by many jurists and lawyers.  We need to move away from these personal attacks and focus on the law. Indeed, the attacks by Giuliani on the integrity of such judges undermines his own credibility and that of his client.

The decision will now permit the Trump to appeal to the Third Circuit (and potentially to the United States Supreme Court).

Here is the opinion: Trump v. Boockvar

155 thoughts on “Uncured: Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Challenge In Pennsylvania”

  1. Huh. The Trump Campaign just released a statement that “Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own. She is not a member of the Trump Legal Team. …”
    https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1330639253240508418 — copy of the full statement and copies of previous statements from Trump and Giuliani that it conflicts with.

    I wonder what line she crossed (from their perspective) for them to put this out.

    1. Uh-oh!

      NeedsToBeCommitted will next inform us that President Trump has her all in a tizzy and irredeemably confused.

      You don’t say!

    2. Because Giuliani didn’t know what strict scrutiny is. And all the other lawyers got chicken and quit….history will ask where were the lawyers….?

      Pakistan will laugh….lawyers?…other country’s cowards….pakistan s lawyers at least stood for the rule of law. And suffered for it.. Here american lawyers cower. Why? They want greased on the other side.

      It should be states sueing rises states for original jurisdiction for a promised Republic….supreme court original jurisdiction for the promised Republic! Yet we watch Rudy fail….when we know it’s all wrong…states don’t have to give full faith and credit to a system they already rejected.

      States need to sue. Ppl versed in equal need to sue. Powell needs to pick up her game…..many have given their lives for America…if it’s lost because some 80 year-old….wants to control the legal team…then our republic is fixed.

      Where is the team? O we sit back and lose our country? How about get on board?

    3. The statement is pretty clear.

      Assuming that Powell is not part of the Trump team it was probably obligatory.

      Nothing preclude Powell from filing claims on here own.

      There are numerous cases currently that are not specifically being brought by Trump’s legal team.

    4. Why do you think she crossed a line (in the negative sense.)?

      Why is everything done by the Trump team a negative just like the knee jerk reaction? I must add that perhaps you didn’t mean it in the negative sense and meant it in the neutral sense, but your overall contributions to the list make one think the statement was made in the negative sense.

  2. ANNIVERSARY

    NOVEMBER 22, 1963

    John F. Kennedy lost the election of November 22, 1963.

    The Deep Deep State removed President John F. Kennedy from office.
    ________________________________________________________

    NOVEMBER 3, 2020

    Donald J. Trump experienced a “rigged” election on November 3, 2020.

    The Deep Deep State attempted to remove President Donald J. Trump from office.

  3. Date: June 12, 2008

    Contact: John Bonifaz, (413) 253-2700

    SEQUOIA VOTING SYSTEMS, INC. USES VOTE-COUNTING SOFTWARE DEVELOPED, OWNED, AND LICENSED BY FOREIGN-OWNED SMARTMATIC,

    A COMPANY LINKED TO THE VENEZUELAN GOVERNMENT OF HUGO CHÁVEZ

    U.S.national security is potentially at risk because software used to count votes in 20% of the country during U.S. elections is owned and controlled by a Venezuelan-run company with ties to the Venezuelan government of Hugo Chávez,1which has been described as “the foremost meddler in foreign elections in the Western hemisphere.”2Foreign-owned and foreign-run Smartmatic’s control over vote-counting software used in the voting machines of Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc. (“Sequoia” or “SVS”) presents a potentialnational securityrisk now just as it did in 2006 when the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”) opened an investigation of Smartmatic’s ownership of Sequoia.3CFIUS is a U.S. government inter-agency committee led by the U.S. Department of Treasurythat addresses national security risks posed by foreign ownership of or influence over U.S. business, including companies providing the means by which voters in the U.S. elect their President and Congressional Representatives.4Rather than answer to CFIUS

    Voter Action
    Seattle, Washington

    voteraction.org

    https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/itl/vote/SequoiaSmartmaticReport61208.pdf

  4. If it is not possible to address election fraud in Pennsylvania – it is not possible to address it anywhere ever.

    The courts decision is that there is no remedy ever for fraud.

    The court has accepted that significantly different standards were used for dealing with mailin ballots in different parts of the state.

    Further the PA Supreme court acknowledged that is was manufacturing its own rules when it allowed votes to be accepted past the statutory limit of 8pm election day.

    The “drastic” remedy that the Trump campaign is asking for is the consequence of the failure to abide by the law. The Trump campaign did not create the problem.

    States are obligated to follow their own rules.

    If the federal court does not wish to impose a drastic remedy – then the courts should have acted properly to require the election officials to follow the law previously.

    With respect to the courts nonsensical argument that there are two few people who were harmed – that is absolute nonsense.

    Every single voter in Pennsylvania was harmed because the state failed to follow the law.

    The court is endorsing lawlessness. Period.

    At the very least the court is obligated to grant the Trump campaign the tools necescary to determine the extent of the misconduct.

    The Trump campaign has clearly demonstrated that many instances of real fraud did occur.

    This is not about the Trump campaign – this is about the integrity of the election. They court has the obligation to order the state to review mailin ballots and determine the extent that invalid ballots were accepted.
    And it has the obligation to order that process be conducted under public oversight.

    47% of the people in this country think that the outcome of this election was the result of fraud.

    They are entitled to an REAL inquiry to determine whether or not that is true.

    I would remind everyhone – invluding the courts – of the language of the declaration of independence.

    “That, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it”

    The courts are playing with fire.

    1. Trump has failed to produce any evidence of fraud. They have had many opportunities. They claim fraud at press conferences yet don’t produce the evidence. They don’t have any. The reason that people think there is fraud is because of they lying, not that there was any fraud.

      1. Molly, Trump lawyers have demonstrated how they believe the fraud occurred. They have plenty of evidence, but that evidence has to be put together in a fashion to convince the SC.

        The reason we are in this mess is because Democrats wanted non-verified votes that could be counted in their favor.

        The burden of proof is on the Trump team. If the burden of proof were on the Biden team Biden would surely lose.

        1. That is not how the court system works. The trial court is the fact-finding court, all evidence needs to be presented there. Appeal courts and SC very rarely looks at evidence. They need to produce it there and they have not.

          1. Federal evidentiary procedures are different from the procedures we are more accustomed to. That is knowledge that lawyers who practice before the federal appellate court and Supreme Court are accustomed to. Some of the claims being made by the Trump lawyers weren’t made specifically to win a specific point rather to preserve the point for the SC

            1. The affadavits Trump produced ARE evidence.

              That the court has failed to take them seriously is a problem with the court – not the process.

              1. That you pretend to read the judge’s mind and assert that he failed to take them seriously is a problem with you, not the court.

                1. I have not claimed to read the judges mind.

                  I do not care much about the judge.

                  I care about the facts.

                  PA and other states failed to follow their own laws.

                  They did so in a way that with certainty facilitated fraud.

                  That is fraud.

                  The open question was the scale of the fraud. That requires inquiry that neither the state nor the courts have allowed.

                  That is error on the part of the courts.

                  1. “the court has failed to take them seriously” is pretending to read the judge’s mind. You even admitted elsewhere that you hadn’t read Brann’s ruling.

                    1. ““the court has failed to take them seriously” is pretending to read the judge’s mind. You even admitted elsewhere that you hadn’t read Brann’s ruling.”

                      Nope, If I tell you that a Train is coming down the tracks – and you stand in the middle of the tracks – it is reasonable conclusion to state that you did not take my statement seriously.

                      I do not have to read Brann’s oppinion. Just as I do not have to read Mao’s little red book, or Marx’s Das Capital to know that are deeply flawed.

                      You are not very good at logic,

          2. MG – the evidence has been produced – and entered at the trial court level. Despite your claims to the contrary.

            The most important evidence is known by most all of us.

            The most fundimental issue is the failure of states to follow their own laws.

            The evidence of that is on the record all over the place.

            PA SCOTUS openly ignored PA law and created new deadlines for mailin ballots from thin air, and even then the court deadlines were ignored.

            Despite the law requiring public observation of the processing of mailin ballots specifically for the purposes of challenging dubious ballots, observers were not allowed.

            Further the state directed election officials differently in different areas, and then varied their direction over time, while uniformly disregarding court orders.

            All these occured – all are evidence, many are questions of LAW not fact – which are the domain of appeals courts.

            1. The mail-in votes in PA that came in late were not counted in the totals and are irrelevant. So is the rest of John Say’s claims. all of which were destroyed by the Federalist Society GOP judge in Pennsylvania. John is practiced at denying reality and facts and denouncing science and experts is in his tool bag. But his supposed high standards, the entire election, including all down ticket offices, should be thrown out for not being perfect and so should 2016. Wake up, doofus, they never are. Mistakes are made when collecting and tabulating 150 million ballots votes. Problem for you is Biden has at present 6.5 million more than Trump and you can’t find that many mistakes. You can’t 150k to overturn Michigan, 80k for Pennsylvania, and 12k for Georgia. That’s the ball game. You lost. get ready for next year.

              1. “The mail-in votes in PA that came in late were not counted in the totals and are irrelevant.”
                Because you say so.

                There have been multiple court decisions on this – including SCOTUS.

                Ultimately the courts ordered late arriving votes to be segregated. They did not order them to not be counted.

                It is unlikely the order to segregate was followed. Regardless, the votes were counted.

                If you have a credible source that proves otherwise – and I do not mean some reporter spouting nonsense.

                Y&ou do not seem to understand how incredibly little integrity and credibility that you, the left democrats and the media have.

                “John is practiced at denying reality and facts and denouncing science and experts is in his tool bag. ”

                Science depends on math – something you left wingnuts can seem to grasp.

                We can play dueling experts forever. But yours can not add.

                “But his supposed high standards, the entire election, including all down ticket offices, should be thrown out for not being perfect and so should 2016.”

                That’s right prevaricate. This is not about being perfect. But it is about fraud – deliberately choosing to violate the law, The scale does not matter, but by all appearances the scales was substantial.

                As to down ballot races – alot of angry voters will ensure that you do not pull this nonsense again.

                And why is it that you think down ballot candidates did not benefit from the same fraud ?
                An invalid ballot is an invalid ballot, no matter which candidates were on the ballot.

                “Wake up, doofus, they never are. Mistakes are made when collecting and tabulating 150 million ballots votes.”
                The error in a properly run election is extremely small. Even third world countries manage to do better than this.

                But we are not talking about random errors – we are talking about deliberate choices not to follow the law.

                If all we were discussing was small random error no one would care much,

                “Problem for you is Biden has at present 6.5 million more than Trump and you can’t find that many mistakes.”

                You do not see to get it – I do not care. I do not care if Biden is Mother Theresa – though he is not, fraud is fraud.
                I do not care what the outcome is. I care whether the process is lawful.

                “You can’t 150k to overturn Michigan, 80k for Pennsylvania, and 12k for Georgia.”
                Maybe, maybe not. My objective is not to elect Trump. It is to ensure that this kind of mess never happens again.

                We learned nothing from Bush V. Gore in 2000 – if anything we made things worse.

                Trump asked for an election commission in 2017.
                But Democrats tanked it – because what needs to be done to eliminate election fraud is simple and well known, and democrats have constantly opposed it.

                “That’s the ball game.”
                I am not playing ball.

                BTW while the courts are not likely to do this – I would entirely throw out all mailin ballots.
                That was the risk mailin voters took when they voted that way.

                “You lost.”
                I did not vote for Trump – not in 2016, not in 2020.
                But I did expect a lawful election.,,

                “get ready for next year.”

                Considering that in a fraudulent election you barely managed to defeat Trump, You did badly in the senate races in a year that was supposed to favor democrats, and you got pummelled in the congressional election, and you have a very angry republican electorate – 72% of which think you stole the election, and they are voting in 2022, I would not be in a rush for the next election if I were you.

                But there are worse things that can happen between now and then.

                When nearly 50% of the country thinks the election was stolen by election fraud, you are risking people taking the law into their own hands.

                When government is lawless, ordinary people are justified in using force.

                You do not seem to grasp the importance of the rule of law.

        2. Kayla, the SC will not look at this. As noted by the judge, the Trump team is asking to disenfranchise millions of voters due to allegations concerning many less votes than necessary t overturn the result. Further they are asking for this only on one race while down ticket elections would remain in place though based on the same ballots. As to the equal protection claim, it is not that Trump voters were treated differently than Biden voters.

          We all understand your desperation and willingness to believe the most unlikely events took place so you don;t have to face losing the election. The 2016 election was much closer and Hillary conceded the next day, wished Trump well, and had the guts to show up at the inauguration in support of our government. You should take a lesson and quit listening to the President and his lawyers who are lying to line up future earning and are putting America Last and trump first. He’s not worth it.

          1. “Kayla, the SC will not look at this”

            JF, I generally don’t bother with more than a phrase or two of your posts. Your posts contain too many gross errors that are repeated over and over again.

            You are not an expert on the SC, however, I would like to know precisely what you say the SC won’t look into.

          2. “Kayla, the SC will not look at this. As noted by the judge, the Trump team is asking to disenfranchise millions of voters due to allegations concerning many less votes than necessary t overturn the result.”

            False and irrelevant.

            The implimentation of the voting system is the responsibility of the state and election officials.

            Your argument is essentially – that because the election has been conducted in a fashion that fraud has occured, and it can not be corrected without other harms we do not want, that we must allow the fraud.

            It is the election officials that dienfranchised millions of voters, Not the Trump campaign.

            All of us – the Trump campaign, the Biden campaign and most important ALL VOTERS are entitled to an election that we can trust.

            I would note that the presence of SOME fraud does not inherently invalidate the entire election.

            But it DOES REQUIRE much deeper inquiry. Evidence of actual fraud REQUIRES further investigation – not burying your head in the sand.

            As the court has noted – the Trump campaign proved specific instances of fraud.

            We can not assume that there is no further fraud anymore than we can assume there is 100,000 times as much fraud.

            We can not accept the results of the election until we KNOW how much fraud there was.

            “Further they are asking for this only on one race while down ticket elections would remain in place though based on the same ballots.”
            That is correct – The Trump campaign is not obligated to address all other potential fraud.

            But if other campaigns wish to allege fraud they are free to do so.

            “As to the equal protection claim, it is not that Trump voters were treated differently than Biden voters.”

            Of course they were. 95% of the precincts in the country followed their state law.
            A small portion did not. That is a massive equal protection problem.

            “We all understand your desperation”
            Not desparate.

            The fundimental issue is that democrats are not trusted, For good reason. You spent the past 4 years lying.
            Democrats did it, the left did it, the MSM did it. It was done on an enormous scale, if there was not formal conspiracy to lie, there was at the very least an informal on.

            Put simply you have lost the trust of much of the electorate.

            After years of lying – you then failed to follow the law in conducting elections in your precincts.

            Trump did not make you do that – you did it to yourselves.

            This is not about Trump, This is not about whether Biden won. This is about how much fraud you committed.

            Even if it was only a little – which no one beleives, there must be a consequence.

            Lets say after a thorough audit it is found that across the contested states there are tens of thousands of illegitimate ballots.

            Not enough to change the outcome.

            Still there are more than enough that lots of people should go to jail.

            Or don’t you think that people should go to jail for election fraud ?

            “and willingness to believe the most unlikely events took place so you don;t have to face losing the election. ”

            It is a FACT that the PA supreme court legislated from the bench – changing PA election law with no authority to do so.
            That is not some speculation – it happened.

            It is a FACT that the the Wolf administration gave out conflicting and changing direction regarding the handling of mailin ballots – direction that was not consistent with the laws.

            “The 2016 election was much closer and Hillary conceded the next day, wished Trump well, and had the guts to show up at the inauguration in support of our government.”
            Not in the real world. Both Clinton and you and the whole democratic party spent the next 4 years making false claims that Trump only won because of Russian Collusion – a claim that we know was manufactured by Clinton.

            “You should take a lesson and quit listening to the President and his lawyers who are lying to line up future earning and are putting America Last and trump first. He’s not worth it.”

            Weird Claim.

            Still not about Trump – the problem is that you, democrats, the left, and the MSM have lied so much – no one beleives you.

            This has little to do with Trump – beyond that he is not rolling over for you.

            And where is this idiotic claim that Trump and his lawyers are somehow in this for future earnings ?

            How does that work ? The Trump families net worth declined over his presidency.
            It is Biden that has leveraged public power into personal wealth.

            If Trump’s lawyers fail miserably in this action – it will HARM their future earnings, not help them.

            I would further note that $15B was spent in this election. $10B by Democrats and $5B by republicans.

            The overwhelming majority of republican money came from small donors, the overwhelming majority of democrat money came from huge donors.

            Sorry Joe, but Democrats are the party of monied special interests – not republicans.

            1. “Your argument is essentially – that because the election has been conducted in a fashion that fraud has occured, and it can not be corrected without other harms we do not want, that we must allow the fraud.”

              John, you like to put words in people’s mouths. This suit didn’t allege fraud, and the Trump Campaign didn’t provide any evidence of fraud to Judge Brann.

              LMAO that you say things like “The Trump families net worth declined over his presidency,” when you don’t know what their net worth was in 2016 and what it is now, and “The overwhelming majority of republican money came from small donors, the overwhelming majority of democrat money came from huge donors,” when you don’t present any proof.

              1. “John, you like to put words in people’s mouths.”
                Then you would be able to identify how my summary of your argument and its implications is wrong.

                Affadavits are evidence.

                Failure to follow the election law is fraud.

                Why are you even debating this ?

                “LMAO that you say things like “The Trump families net worth declined over his presidency,” when you don’t know what their net worth was in 2016 and what it is now,”
                You can check Trump and Families net worth on Forbes.

                ” “The overwhelming majority of republican money came from small donors, the overwhelming majority of democrat money came from huge donors,” when you don’t present any proof.”

                Are you honestly arguing this ? Are you clueless ? Democrats have been BRAGGING about outraising Republicans 2:1.

                Wall Street gave Trump 18M, they gave Biden 74M – do we need to go into Google or the rest of Silicon Valley ?

                The lionshare of corporate money went to democrats.

                1. It wasn’t my argument, it was JF’s argument, and you’re the one claiming that “the election has been conducted in a fashion that fraud has occured,” not him.

                  You can find estimates of Trump’s net worth in several places. None of them know his net worth and the estimates differ –
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_of_Donald_Trump

                  Telling us that “The lionshare of corporate money went to democrats” isn’t proof. It’s telling us to rely on your word, but your word isn’t reliable. You’re also moving the goalposts from your original claim that “The overwhelming majority of republican money came from small donors, the overwhelming majority of democrat money came from huge donors”, which is about the fraction of the total that came from large donors vs. small donors, not about the fraction of corporate $ going to Rs versus Ds.

                  Here’s some data for you to start with –
                  https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/biggest-donors
                  opensecrets.org/elections-overview/top-organizations

                  1. “It wasn’t my argument, it was JF’s argument,”

                    That only makes your response worse.

                    Regardless – you are anonymous – you do not exist.

                    Each post is unique there is not history – you do not get to claim one.
                    You do not get to claim ownership of a prior post.

                    You have no credibility or reputation.

                    How do I even know which anonymous you are.

                    1. “no credibility”

                      Says the guy who told us repeatedly that Trump was going to win and now claims fraud when none of the president’s lawyers do in court.

                    2. JF – Wow! – it is amazing to watch as you piss away even more of your credibility,

                      First – my ACTUAL words speak for themselves – everyone is free to examine my public statements. Regardless, your 5 word summary has no resemblance to anything I have said.

                      Why would anyone trust a person like yourself who can not even accurately restate public statements from the past.

                      Next, your remark is about election predictions. Nor only does it claim i made a prediction that I never made, but it claims that the false prediction I never made impacts my credibility on non-predictive issues. Basically your statement is about as false as it could be.

                      One thing I did say REPEATEDLY was that I HOPED that the election was not close. That the worst case scenario for the country was a close election which would result on all kinds of allegations of Fraud. Anyone hear who doubts that had Trump won narrowly we would still see a legal battle needs only to read the news stories about the Biden campaign plotting their legal strategy challenging a trump victory.

                      Regardless, I did not vote for Trump – not in 2016, or 2020. I am not a Trump supporter, i am not part of Trump’s legal team.

                      In short I am and have always been free to speak the truth regardless of right left ideological nonsense.

                      And the Truth is this election was rife with fraud, and the lefts efforts to hide that and in many instances to participate are damning.

                      Further I am not claiming fraud – the Fraud I cite clearly happened. We conducted a mailin election – something we already know is highly fraud prone and will have large amounts of error and fraud NO MATTER WHAT, and then we did not follow the laws that we had to constrain that Fraud.

                      Failing to follow the law in an election – is itself Fraud. It is not benign. We have listened to the left rant that Trump and his campaign did not follow laws that do not even exist fort the past 4 years.

                      We have listened to YOU demand investigations of alleged violations of laws that you WISH into existance.

                      How about we actually follow the law in elections ?

                    3. As to personal credibility – pretty much exactly what I predicted and feared has come to pass.
                      My track record on political predictions is uncannily good.

                      The polls were off – by between 5 and 15 pts depending on the state.

                      The election is incredibly close. There was more than sufficient fraud to effect the outcome of not merely the presidential race, but many many races, Democrats in big cities had highly unusual and irregular outcomes, election laws were not followed.
                      And now atleast 100 million americans beleive the election was stolen.

                      My predictions have been excellent – how about you ? Where was that Biden wave we were told to expect ?

                      But I will throw you a bone.

                      Credibility with respect to predictions – particularly of things that are driven by opinions such as elections rather than facts are unrelated to credibility with respect to facts.

                      Sean Trende – to name only one election handicapper that blew 2020, probably should not be trusted for 2022 or 2024.

                      But that says nothing regarding his credibility as a witness to a crime, or his recount of events that he witnessed.

                      JF – you do not understand credibility and intergrity at all. Probably because you have none.

                  2. “the election has been conducted in a fashion that fraud has occured,”

                    That is self evident. In fact that can be presumed – there is always fraud. The only question is how much.

                    We have conducted this election in a way to assure that there was significantly more.

                    Worse we have conduced it in a way that there could be enormous fraud.

                    Worse still – half the country does not care. that will not end well.

                    1. John,
                      I posted a list of steps we should take for the least amount of election fraud. If you compare that list with what we have today, it is undeniable our current process is designed for widespread fraud.

                    2. Olly

                      Trustworthy elections are not that hard. Though I have sometimes addressed specific steps to acheive them, the most important issue, the core problem that we face is that democrats fight tooth and nail any effort to make elections trustworthy.

                    3. John Say, you are a fantastic thinker and writer. I don’t who you are or what ya do for a living, but I bet you’re darn good at both (I know, that was awkwardly stated but I’m exhausted from cutting wood. Now, it’s time to split (the wood, that is). Keep your posts coming – really enjoy them.

                    4. Thank you.

                      I do many things “for a living”.
                      I am actively invested in real estate. My regret is not having done so sooner.
                      I am an architect, I was the managing principle for a medium sized practice for 22 years.
                      Today I am building a new business in Due Dilligence/Code work that is entirely mine that has managed to grow from only myself to 6 people in the midst of a pandemic.
                      And I am an embedded software engineer. I have my real name on a small part of the linux kernel. I have written software that is part of “preditors”, AEGIS, monitoring nuclear compliance as well as life safety systems in vehicles – software that can not fail. In that line of work if I make errors of logic very bad things happen – people are are harmed and possibly die.

                      I enjoy life, and I do not appreciate those who wish to tell me how I must live it. Especially those who have never accomplished anything on their own. Conversely I respect the accomplishments of those that have done more than I have – whether I agree with them on issue or not.

                  3. If you were looking to find out what one of the wealthies 400 people in the US was worth – who would you trust – Wikipedia, or Forbes ?

                    Regardless:

                    1). Forbes estimates are fairly detailed. Ownership of real property in the US is public record, and most of Trump’s assets are real property.

                    2), Varying estimates from varying sources does not change anything. Do you have a single source with a credible estimate that Trump’s networth increased during his presidency ?

                    Even if sources do not agree on Trump’s networth, they still agree on the trend.

                    3). If Trump’s net worth increased as a result of being president – you would have to know. There is nothing the president does that is secret.

                    Just as there is no doubt what Biden did in Ukriane (or China) – nor that his son profited only whether Joe Biden himself profited.

                    “Telling us that “The lionshare of corporate money went to democrats” isn’t proof.”
                    That is correct.

                    I do not owe you proof. I have established a reputation of credibiltiy and intergrity.

                    You do not even exist beyond your last post.

                    “It’s telling us to rely on your word,”
                    No, you are capable of checking things for yourself. Though it appears below you are not.

                    “but your word isn’t reliable.”
                    Coming from someone who does not even exist ?

                    “You’re also moving the goalposts from your original claim”
                    Whatever I actually said, I will stand behind – you are not trustworthy enough to rely on a purported quote.

                    BTW here is another example of the lack of intergrity of democrats.
                    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/09/13/surprise-surprise-data-reveals-where-the-majority-of-bidens-donations-came-from–and-its-bad-news-for-dems-n2576113

                    ActBlue does not verify its donations – therefore they can easily come from people who are already over limits or even foreign entitities and fictitious people – doesn;t that sound just like the election fraud ?

                    Regardless a massive number of donors to democrats and actBlue are unemployed – so they claim.

                    Do you expect anyone to beleive that ?

                    “which is about the fraction of the total that came from large donors vs. small donors, not about the fraction of corporate $ going to Rs versus Ds.”
                    Do you have any idea what you are arguing ?

                    The point which you are missing – also the point of the article on democrats taking donations from unverified sources – is that democrats are as always doing what they accuse others of. just as in 2008 – Biden and democrats likely received significant donations from foreigners.

                    Your party which is purportedly the party of the working class – has become the party of the elite. Of corporate donors.

                    You rant about Citizen’s united – but Democrats are the beneficiaries of it.

                    I do not personally care that Democrats money came from corporate donors – but YOU DO. I do not care if democrats received money from foreign countries – but YOU DO.

                    You are not arguing with me – you are fighting the contradictions in your own values.

                    You rant about some purported Bait and switch on my part and they sell bait and switches from Open Secrets.

                    I have no problems with their data – but it has nothing to do with what we are arguing about

                    Wow Adelson contributed almost $200M to conservative causes – find another 4.9B and you will have all republican money.

                    Democrats collected about 10B – Donors are going to expect a return on their substantial investment.

                    But keep your head in the sand. You have to be able to hide from cognative disonance to be a progressive – because the facts and history tell you your wrong about everything.

                    I do not expect you to take my word for anything – you will not learn anything. I expect you to quit taking anyone’s word merely because their ideology appeals to you. The only thing necescary to get red pilled – is to open your eyes to reality.

      2. “Trump has failed to produce any evidence of fraud. ”
        False. Even the latest 3rd circuit decision found that much of the evidence Trump produced demonstrated fraud. The court just found the proven scale of the fraud insufficient to warrant the remedy Trump asked for.

        “They have had many opportunities.”
        False, one of the things the Trump campaign is after is a review of the outer envelopes of the mailin ballots – to confirm if these were valid votes and voters. Do not be deluded – this IS going to occur eventually. It may take months, but states are required by law to preserve these for 2 years and required by law to provide them to FOIA requiest. Eventually the extent of invalid ballots in this election will be known.

        The norm for first time voters in mailin or absentee ballots is 20%, the norm for regular absentee voters is 6%, In Philadelphia only 0.25% of ballots were found to have errors that disquilified them. As recently as the Democratic primaries -20% of mailin ballots were disqualified.

        Mailin voting did not suddenly become 400 times more reliable in the past 9 months.

        “They claim fraud at press conferences yet don’t produce the evidence.”
        And yet they have – I beleive they have over 100 affadavits at this time – those are called EVIDENCE.

        “They don’t have any. The reason that people think there is fraud is because of they lying, not that there was any fraud.”

        The reason most people think there is fraud are:

        Because there is always fraud in elections.
        Because there is an order of magnitude more fraud in mailin elections.
        Because the left and the media has $h!t all over their credibility and you are deservedly not trusted by large portions of the country.

        Because unlike those on the left the rest of us are not idiots.

        1. I don’t know what decision you read but the one at issue here did not have any evidence of fraud. They were trying to argue equal protection because some counties allowed ballots to be cured and some did not. They claim to have evidence, but they don’t produce it. Even what you wrote proves my point. You said they want to look at ballot envelopes to audit them for fraud, that is very different then having evidence of fraud.

          This has been the most scrutinized election in history, and Trump can’t even produce enough evidence to survive a motion to dismiss.

          1. MollyG, these people are infants and unable to face reality. They lost, they know it and wish against reasonable hope that their leader is not the liar and con men the rest of us identified years ago. This election was not close, and down ticket candidates who they support are somehow supposed to be magically immune from the manufactured doubts and challenges they want exercised only on the Presidential race and only in the states they lost. Can you be more infantile than that fantastic wish?

            Meanwhile they rail against Democrats who accepted the much closer 2016 election and acted like the adults and patriots we expect our leaders to be – Hillary conceded immediately, Obama had Trump to the WH for an 1.5 hour meeting, BIden hosted Pence at the VP residence and Michelle had a tea for Melania. What does their leader do? He sulks in the WH, too afraid to make a personal or televised appearance, avoiding all his presidential responsibilities and doing his best to sabotage the next administration, including coordination on the virus, which will literally cost lives. This low life d.ck puts Trump first and America last and still these fools put him ahead of country and duty.

            Suck it up babies. You lost. It’s a democracy, big f..ing deal. It happens. We know that and we put up with 4 years in the WH of a guy most of us would avoid in our normal life and who didn’t even win the most votes. That was the 2nd time that happened in 16 years, and none of us here were threatening to shoot anybody or start a civil war.

            Don’t be like Trump. Grow up.

            1. “Meanwhile they rail against Democrats who accepted the much closer 2016 election and acted like the adults and patriots”…
              You’re joking, right? Democrats accepted Trump’s win? When did that happen?

              1. Clinton called Trump the morning after the election and conceded. Obama and Biden met with Trump and Pence at the WH just a couple of days after the election and started the transition process.

                1. While Clinton was feeding the FBI russian Disinformation to undermine his presidency and the Obama administration was gobbling it up.

                  You do not need to tell us what happened – we were all here.

                  I do not need an “Expert”, or “scientist” to explain the misconduct of Clinton and Obama – I watched it real time.

          2. You keep ranting that there is no evidence.

            We both live in the same real world.

            presumably you are aware that nearly all the contested states had democratic governors who made up election rules on their own without the consent of their legislatures.

            AS a specific example in PA the election law is in PA 421.
            Wolf did not follow it.

            The PA Supreme court did not follow it – and admitted they did not.

            The law has no provisions for curing of invallid ballots.

            It is the duty of a voter to follow the requirements for voting.
            It is fraud for anyone to assist them in voting.

            We vote alone in secret – that is a requirement to preclude fraud.

            That did not occur. Mailin voting can not meet the requirements for trustworthy elections.

            Regardless, “curing” ballots, is no different from ignoring voter ID laws.

            While it is possible that curing ballots corrects an error such that a legitimate voters vote counts.
            It is also certain that it correct ballots that are truly fraudulent. There is no means to tell them apart.
            That makes those election officials engaged in “curing” complicit in Fraud.

            Deadlines were ignored – that is fraud.
            Rules requiring oversight were ignored – that is fraud.
            Rules regarding the processing of ballots were ignored – that is fraud.

            We know that each of these things occured.
            The court knows them.
            You know them.

          3. “This has been the most scrutinized election in history,”

            Only in left wing nut world.

            There has been absolutely no scrutiny of any kind by outside observers of mailin ballots.

            I would note that many of the affidavits Trump has produced are by DEMOCRAT Whistleblowers involved in the election procress.

            Democratic governors have gone out of their way to avoid scrutiny.

        2. False. No, John Say you are an idiot.

          There is usually very little fraud in our elections and numerous studies confirm that fact. The penalties are severe and the payoff almost non-existent. Of course in court, where there are penalties for lying, Trump’s attorneys have said they were not alleging fraud.

          Trump and his stooges have crapped all over their credibility in an obvious attempt to avoid reality. Trump telegraphed this response numerous times before the election and his stooges are either paid to be stooges or trained to believe only him, though he is proven among the most mendacious humans to ever walk the earth.

          This election was not close, certainly much less so than the 2016 election when Hillary conceded the next day, wished her opponent well, and attended the inauguration in a show of her support for our government. We all know Trump can’t afford to admit he lost and won’t and dollars to donuts does not have the balls to go to the inauguration.

          1. “False. No, John Say you are an idiot.”

            Because you say so ? Regardless, fallacious ad hominem.

            “There is usually very little fraud in our elections and numerous studies confirm that fact.”
            False. Do you know that when the 2000 HAV forced the retirement of mechanical voting machines that they found that none had not been altered with teeth filed off or other machinations.

            So we had someone go to the trouble to alter a mechanical voting machine to win and election, and for decades afterwords myriads of other elections where being altered by the same machines over and over and over.

            If people went to the trouble to do so for decades 20 years ago -do you really think they suddenly stopped after 2000 ?

            There is the infamous example of Johnson stuffing 80,000 votes to win his senate seat,
            There is the infamous 60K dead people voting in Chicago in the 1960 election.

            In every modern election, we can find districts accross the country were more people voted than are registered.

            Whether you like it or not election fraud is quite common. Is it on the scale of 100000 votes ? Probably not ordinarily – but we ordinarily have almost entirely inperson secret ballots – which are the hardest to commit fraud, and by far the hardest to commit systemic fraud.

            Even so dozens of people are prosecuted for inperson fraud in every election – and that is despite the fact that inperson fraud is nearly impossible to prove.

            Regardless, you are clueless.

            You can get your head out of you a$$ and work to fix this or the BEST case is that you will end up with the parties competing to see who can get away with the most fraud.

            You do not seem to grasp that there are lots of people in both parties who are perfectly willing to commit fraud if they think they can get away with it.

            In person systemic fraud is hard. But inperson individual fraud is not.

            Mailin fraud is trivial. If you do not think it has occured you are blind.

            I would further note that the scale is not all that important either.

            Bush/Gore 2000 was decided by a few hundred votes. As you note constantly 2016 was decided by 70,000 votes across several states.

            Myriads of elections in the past several decades have been decided on razor thin margins.

            The normal error rate for mailin elections is over 20% -that alone is a major problem.

            “The penalties are severe and the payoff almost non-existent.”

            False, the penalities are relatively low, and the odds of getting caught negligable.

            And the payoffisin trillions of dollars.

            You do not think that $10B was contributed to the democrats in this cycle because there is no payoff ?

            You have been telling us all how money corrupts politics – and now suddenly it does not ?

            “Of course in court, where there are penalties for lying, Trump’s attorneys have said they were not alleging fraud.”
            What are you smoking ?

            And when are the Bidens going to answer questions about Ukriane under oath ?

            “Trump and his stooges have crapped all over their credibility in an obvious attempt to avoid reality.”
            Coming from you ?

            “Trump telegraphed this response numerous times before the election”
            Absolutely – he made it clear that if Democrats did not play by the rules that there would be a legal fight.

            Trump telegraphed exactly what he would do if you did not play by the rules.
            Trump is highly predictable. But you did not listen.

            “and his stooges are either paid to be stooges or trained to believe only him,”
            Again – democrats outspent republicans 2:1 seems the paid stooges are on the left.

            “though he is proven among the most mendacious humans to ever walk the earth.”
            And yet the long list of the lies has been yours, the left, the press, democrats.

            “This election was not close,”
            It was quite close – but that is not the point.

            “certainly much less so than the 2016 election when Hillary conceded the next day, wished her opponent well, and attended the inauguration in a show of her support for our government.”
            You can say that and expect to be taken credibly ?

            “We all know Trump can’t afford to admit he lost and won’t and dollars to donuts does not have the balls to go to the inauguration.”

            Who cares.

            I am more interested in the integrity of elections than Trump or Biden.

            I have been fighting for trustworthy elections for 2 decades.

            Where have you been ?

            Off selling the lie that fraud is rare, steeply punished, and without any payoff.

        3. “Even the latest 3rd circuit decision found that much of the evidence Trump produced demonstrated fraud” is an outright lie. The ruling doesn’t mention “fraud” even once.

          1. You keep lobbing moral handgrenades and are surprised when they do not blow up in your face.

            Not interested in your word games.

            The State of PA did not follow its own election laws.

            Are you honestly disputing that ?

            That is fraud and/or facilitating fraud.

            If a robber comes to the back door of a store and you let him in – you are an accessory to the crime.

            If the robber only manages to steal a quarter – it is still a crime and you are an accessory.

            1. I’m not interested in relying on your word, which isn’t reliable. Show with evidence — not your word — that the State of PA did not follow its own election laws and that it’s legal fraud according to PA law. Show with evidence — not your word — that “the latest 3rd circuit decision found that much of the evidence Trump produced demonstrated fraud”.

                1. It is amazing – despite the media’s best efforts to cover for Biden, Democrats, etc,

                  it is still possible without much effort to find out actual facts.

                  And yet so few on the left do.

              1. “I’m not interested in relying on your word,”
                I do not expect you to – despite the fact that I actually have a reputation for credibility – and you do not even exist beyond your current post.

                “which isn’t reliable.”
                And the judgement of someone who does not exist is worth what ?

                “Show with evidence — not your word”
                I do not owe you evidence or anything else. There is plenty to find if you look.

                “that the State of PA did not follow its own election laws”
                Self evident to anyone paying attention.

                ” and that it’s legal fraud according to PA law.”
                There is no “according to PA law” – there is no loophole here.

                If laws do not exist to be followed – especially those constraining government – then we are lawless – courts and government are powerless at best, and at worst mere thugs.

                Yes, it is fraud for government to fail to obey the laws governing government.

      3. You would be more credible if democrats were not fighting tooth and nail against scrutiny.

        Why was the process of validating and counting mailin ballots in Atlanta, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Las Vegas and Detriot done entirely without legally required public scrutiny ?

        If you do not want voters to conclude there is fraud – do not behave as if there is something to hide.

        Each of these states has legal standards for valid ballots. Had you followed the standards and done so with public observers, no one would doubt the results.

        If each state had followed its own laws – rather than had the courts and govenors make up new ones on their own – people would be less likely to beleive there was fraud.

        You have told us repeatedly that Trump’s tax return – which none of us has any right to see is secret because it would reveal crimes.
        Yet now you are telling us that governors secretly validating mailin ballots something that is legally required to be done publicly is not a good reason to suspect misconduct ?

          1. MollyG – it is the courts that first violated the law.

            SCOTUS telegraphed in October where they are headed.

            And the courts ignored it.

            You, and your courts are playing a game of chicken with the Supreme court.

            You might win, but not because the law or constitution or honesty or morality are on your side.

      4. How about the fraud of self. Biden pretended to be something. Harris pretended to be something. Now we find out they are not going to follow our constitution but a bunch of marxist leninist gobble de gook? Are the courts going to sanctify this and if so are the courts going to just PCrap on our Constitution and pizz on us? Are they to be the new Marxist Leninist leadership and using this definition

        ‘The political system of the Soviet Union took place in a federal single-party soviet socialist republic framework which was characterized by the superior role of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the only party permitted by the Constitution’

        A federal single party socialist system? Is that what we can expect from the Comrades of the DNC? What they are preaching these days sounds EXACTLY like that. And since it will be at odd to their office can we expect the new stalinest party to adopt what little of communism they have already mentioned in speeches and interviews across the land?

      1. “Jackass, the suit didn’t allege fraud, and Trump’s lawyers didn’t present any evidence of fraud.”

        Ad Hominem is not an argument.

        I have not read Trump’s court filing, so I will not speak for the Trump Campaign.
        Nor is that my interest.

        That said I have repeatedly noted the many obvious frauds in this election.

        Failure to follow the law is fraud – doing so under the color of law only makes it worse.

        The actions of those handling the mailin ballots are fraud. Knowingly fascilitating fraud is fraud too.

        We know that had the rules been followed about 20% of ballots would have been rejected.
        That is the long term historic experience of first time mailin voters.

        It is what we saw in the democratic primaries in May.

        PA only rejected 0.25% of mailin ballots – that is an 800 times improvement – that is not plausible – EVER.

        It is likely that a significant portion of the 20% that are normally rejected are just incompetence on the part of voters.
        But many are also certainly fraud.

        There is no means to tell the difference between a ballot rejected for incompetence and one rejected for fraud.

        But the weak checks in mailin voting do catch some fraud.

        Failing to impose those checks makes you complicit in the fraud.

          1. You do not seem to grasp what an invalid argument is.
            It has nothing to do with “acceptable”.

            It is acceptable to say “2 +2 = 5”.

            It is not true, nor valid.

            If I say “Only an idiot does not accept 2 + 2 = 4”

            That is a valid argument. It is also not ad hominem.

            If I say “2 + 2 = 4, you idiot”

            That is a valid argument AND ad hominem.

            If I say “you are an idiot”
            That is just ad hominem and no valid argument.

            If I respond to ad homiem with insults – that is nothing.
            The argument was over when you converted the discussion from an argument over fact to insults.

            One of the reasons that ad hominem is fallacy is because it shifts the debate from facts logic, reason to people.
            Once off the rails it is almost impossible to recover.

            And finally – some debates ARE actually about character.

            When you have lied constantly for years, the real issue IS your character.

            1. Again, you use ad hominem yourself, so you must find it acceptable.

              Also, “Jackass, the suit didn’t allege fraud, and Trump’s lawyers didn’t present any evidence of fraud” is a combination of valid argument and ad hominem.

              1. Anonymous, you don’t even bother to look at the other persons arguments and dispel them. All you do is make yourself look toxic and stupid.

              2. Beat that Straw man.

                Acceptable != Valid argument.

                “Blue is my favorite color” is not a valid argument.
                “Also, “Jackass, the suit didn’t allege fraud, and Trump’s lawyers didn’t present any evidence of fraud” is a combination of valid argument and ad hominem.”

                No it is a combination of ad hominem and naked assertions. Self evidently false ones to boot.

            2. “When you have lied constantly for years, the real issue IS your character.”

              This is a more interesting statement than one might initially think. We are discussing right and wrong, ad hominem arguments along with a lot of insults. The one thing we don’t discuss is the character of individual unless the discussion revolves around Trump’s character.

              We know and discuss Trumps character and faults, but over all he has performed well while being as honest as a President can be. He has his quirks but they have not prevented him from providing a lot of good.

              When we look at the Democrat Party and their supporters we see envy, dishonesty and sloth at least contained in the expression of their arguments. They make no effort to seek out the truth and are willing to lie or cheat for the tiniest advantage.

              The problem is not what they want since the actual end product of what they want is mostly a universal want. They are intellectually lazy and skip all the steps to analyze what they want . To accelerate obtaining their desires they are willing to cheat and steal.

              1. This surprises you ?

                Trump is a business person. Contra the left. success in business requires extremely high degrees of honestly.

                Every exchange outside of govenrment is normally free – no one holds a gun to your head.

                No free exchange ever occurs unless both parties beleive they will be better off.
                Further that beleif MUST prove true the overwhelming majority of the time – more than 99% of the time or people would cease to exchange.

                Why 99% ? Because gains must exceed loses, Gains on each exchange are usually small. but the losses in a failed transaction are large, Net gains must exceed net losses, of exchange would not occur.

                Trump may say lots of things that offend some.

                But the people he does business with AND his voters, must beleive after the fact that he has made good on his promises.

                That does not mean that he litterally did what he said. But it does means that his voters beleive that he did what THEY beleive THEY were promissed.

                Sellors often promise more than they deliver – some toothpaste will not result in an army of attractive women.
                But I would not buy it if I did not value it more than the money I paid, and I would not do so again if that value was not delivered. 33

  5. Raffi Melkonian (appellate lawyer):
    “A quick note about the PA lawsuit, now that we’ve all absorbed the opinion last night. The *only* relief that Trump asked for was to prevent certification. You can see it here. So this case winks out of existence the second PA certifies the vote.”

    Steve Vladeck (UT Austin law professor, referring to Melkonian’s tweet):
    “This is a really important point: Once PA certifies, the Trump lawsuit would become moot regardless of whether the (not-yet-filed) appeal is still pending in the Third Circuit or #SCOTUS — because all the Elite Strike Force asked for is a remedy that would then be impossible. And because they lost in the district court, they need more than a stay from the Third Circuit or #SCOTUS; they’d need an injunction pending appeal — which requires an even greater showing to obtain than a stay.”
    https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1330531867695648771

    I hadn’t realized that. Tomorrow is Pennsylvania’s certification date (though I read but haven’t confirmed that one county may be late): https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results_certification_dates,_2020

    Chris Christie on ABC News this morning: “Quite frankly, the conduct of the President’s legal team has been a national embarrassment. They allege fraud outside the courtroom, but when they go inside the courtroom, they don’t plead fraud and they don’t argue fraud.” He said Sidney Powell accusing the Georgia governor of crimes without evidence is “outrageous conduct by any lawyer.” “I have been a supporter of the president’s. I voted for him twice. But elections have consequences and we cannot continue to act as if something happened here that didn’t happen.” He says an unwillingness to present evidence “must mean the evidence doesn’t exist.” Time will tell.

  6. Trump campaign attorney Sidney Powell on Saturday said that the president’s lawyers will file a lawsuit of “biblical” proportions, alleging that some elections officials were embroiled in a pay-to-play scheme with a prominent manufacturer of voting software.

    “We’ve got tons of evidence; it’s so much, it’s hard to pull it all together,” Powell told Newsmax. She didn’t provide or elaborate on the evidence.

    “Hopefully this week we will get it ready to file, and it will be biblical,” Powell asserted, adding that “it’s a massive project to pull this fraud claim together with the evidence that I want to put in.”

    Powell said that voting system’s algorithms provided Democrats 35,000 extra votes, although she didn’t elaborate. She added that Democratic candidate Joe Biden’s votes were “weighted” at 1.25 times while President Donald Trump’s votes were parsed at 0.75.

    The longtime lawyer and former federal prosecutor also alleged that there were modifications to some voting machines after the legal cutoff for changes.

    Powell also said that some governors may have engaged in a pay-to-play scheme to use Dominion Voting Systems—one of the Trump campaign’s chief targets in recent days. “Georgia is probably going to be the first state I’m gonna blow up,” she claimed, accusing Gov. Brian Kemp of engaging in a pay-to-play scheme.
    https://m.theepochtimes.com/trump-lawyer-sidney-powell-promises-biblical-lawsuit-in-coming-days_3588851.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2020-11-22-1

    She’s on the clock.

      1. At any other time and even with any other person I would find it hard to believe.

        But Powell has been on the money start to finish with Flynn.

        There is no claim she has made she has not backed up.

        It is not hard to beleive this has occured. It is hard to beleive that Powell has the evidence.

        But then we have been through 4 years of this nonsense.

        I find is impossible to beleive all the stunts that democrats have pulled – and that even today the media has let them get away with.

        If Power had DVS on the phone with Joe Biden planning election fraud – the MSM would ignore it.

        1. Powell hasn’t been on the money with Flynn. Anyone who thinks she has hasn’t been paying attention to all of the evidence.

          1. Anyone who has actually paid attention to the evidence knows far batter than you.

            Flynn’s prosecution was exactlyt he mess that none other than RBG warned about.

            1. Anyone who has actually paid attention to the evidence can read Powell’s errors in the filings, opinions, and transcripts.

              1. Rather than tell us all that Powell made errors – something you do not have the credibility to assert.

                Provide evidence of errors.

                Though I would note the issue is not – has Sydney Powell acted without error.

                The standard is – has Sydney Powell been correct, and she has an excellent track record of backing up claims.

  7. Judges ruling:

    “….this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state…..

    By seeking injunctive relief preventing certification of the Pennsylvania election results, Plaintiffs ask this Court to do exactly that. Even assuming that they can establish that their right to vote has been denied, which they cannot, Plaintiffs seek to remedy the denial of their votes by invalidating the votes of millions of others. Rather than requesting that their votes be counted, they seek to discredit scores of other votes, but only for one race. This is simply not how the Constitution works….”

    Amusing that only the Presidential result is challenged when the same ballots elected numerous down ticket candidates.

    1. LOL, Rhodes, if you paid attention to the news, you’d know that the claim “Thousands of precincts all reporting significant over vote in Michigan. Russell Ramsland of Allied Security Group, LLC of Dallas, TX swore an affidavit concerning a detailed audit his company did on voting machines in Texas in 2018. He wrote in detail of the many serious security inadequacies of the software and then examined the 2020 Presidential vote count in a number of counties in Michigan” is erroneously based on data from Minnesota (e.g., https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/20/trump-lawsuit-mixes-up-red-flags-michigan-minnesota/6362056002/ and if you don’t like USA Today, just do an internet search on something like [election fraud in Michigan based on data from Minnesota] to see other reporting about it).

      Why would you link to a site with such obvious falsehoods?

      1. Saw that CTHD. Elsewhere the blog notes various ways the vote was anomalous. Helllooooo! The biggest turnout in over 100 years, the winner receiving 80 million votes and beating an incumbent by the greatest margin on a percentage basis (by votes, fogetabout it) since FDR beat Hoover. Yeah, all anomalous, just like having a baby in the WH who won’t face the music. It’s the equivalent of Bobby Knight throwing a chair onto the court, unsurprisingly, a Trump supporter.

        Did he note that Biden under performed Hillary in Philly and Detroit while outperforming her in red and blue districts throughout Pennsylvania and Michigan. That’s not what you expect to see if vote rigging in the big cities was going on.

  8. This post tells me two things: firstly, there is little chance of a fair election in Georgia. Two, even ‘classical liberals’, though not actively aggressive, are deluded to the point they might as well be wearing Antifa t-shirts. The cognitive dissonance is just jaw dropping. They desire the old status quo just as much as the dem cronies they criticize.

    It really is like brainwashing in America – the word ‘Democrat’ is inviolate and sacrosanct, it has gone through the generational prefrontal cortex and is just spinning on automatic in the subconscious (and some claim non-dems have the lizard brains? Uh-huh). That such folks will turn around and poke the triggered is hysterical when they exhibit the same behavior on the regular. Hint: the words don’t matter, our responses, which we control, do. Hence our system of law. This type of ‘grown up’ triggering to things that ‘really matter’ is exactly zero degrees different than an idiot child flipping out that there are no french fries at Taco Bell. And we wonder why their kids turned out this way. Sheesh.

    So much for intelligent people examining ideas and actions based on their content. It boggles my mind that the once most advanced nation on earth has sunk to these depths of ignorance, ennui, and plain and simple moral and intellectual laziness. Let’s call Biden Caligula and be done.

    1. This column is about a case in PA, not in GA.

      There was a fair election in GA. Georgia has already certified the vote, and the hand count in GA shows that Trump’s legal team is lying about the Dominion voting machines.

      Stephen Fowler, responding to Sidney Powell saying Powell “Georgia is probably going to be the first state I’m going to blow up…”:
      “These are lies and conspiracies with dangerous consequences.
      “Top election officials in Georgia are under police protection because a growing number of people believe this utter crock. Also, there’s been no lawsuit with any iota of evidence – and results are already certified!”
      https://twitter.com/stphnfwlr/status/1330502522302308359 — embedded video of Powell

      Powell is bizarrely accusing Republican Gov. Kemp and the Republican Secretary of State of being involved in a conspiracy to elect Biden.

      Fowler’s thread also embeds a tweet from Gabriel Sterling, Voting System Implementation Manager for GA, who said ”So this is fun…multiple attempted hacks of my emails, police protection around my home, the threats. But all is well…following the the law, following the process…doing our jobs.” and one from reporter Amy Gardner, who noted: “The hand counted audit in GA disproves definitively that the Dominion machines were hacked or undercounted Trump votes. The audit FOUND votes favoring Trump that had not been counted at all. It matched the machine count exactly in some counties and within single digits in others.”

      Those threats to Sterling are some of the “dangerous consequences” of Powell’s and Giuliani’s lies.

      You might want to reconsider who is trying to do the “brainwashing.”

      1. “This column is about a case in PA, not in GA. There was a fair election in GA. Georgia has already certified the vote, and the hand count in GA shows that Trump’s legal team is lying about the Dominion voting machines.”

        These are all conclusions absent fact. At the SC if the Trump team convinces the judges that massive fraud occurred in Pennsylvania they will be more likely to look at Georgia and all states. Likewise, if massive fraud is first demonstrated in any state. I don’t think it makes a difference that GA certified its votes because the Trump team is claiming fraud. The hand-count without validating every ballot leaves open the question of fraud.

        “Powell is bizarrely accusing Republican Gov. Kemp and the Republican Secretary of State of being involved in a conspiracy to elect Biden.”

        What is so bizarre? Powell can be proven correct or not. It is not bizarre that an official might have engaged in a pay for play scheme.

        “Those threats to Sterling are some of the “dangerous consequences” of Powell’s and Giuliani’s lies.”

        I’m glad to hear you talk about violence as being dangerous considering the burning and destruction in many of our cities. However, Powell and Giuliani don’t consider what they are saying lies. They consider them true and we will know better after a hearing before the SC. When violence is permitted by the left eventually violence extends to them as well. Prosecute those that threaten violence on others but the rights of disenfranchised Republicans have to be respected.

        What proof do you have that would convince a jury that Powell and Giuliani are lying?

        Brainwashing? Look at the left-wing brainwashing coming from the MSM, academia, Hollywood, and social media

        1. Can we cut the “lying” Crap.

          There remain problems in GA that were not addressed by the recount – the same problems as many other states.

          The GA hand recount does cast doubt on the claim that Domion voting Sytems are at the root of some significant fraud.

          The GA recount does NOT disprove that claim – there is evidence of real problems in other states – and even in GA the DVS systems failed, but not sufficiently to significantly change the outcome.

          I ultimately suspect that DVS will be found to be problematic, but NOT fundimentally biased.
          Though I would note that every single error attributed to a DVS system thus far has added votes to Trump – even in GA.

          Regardless, there is no systemic evidence at this time that DVS was engaged in malfeasance rather than incompetence.

          There is plenty of reason to subject DVS to further scrutiny. And good reason not to use their equipment. But it is unlikely after the GA recount – but not impossible that DVS was engaged in fraud rather than incompetence and error on a small scale.

          The GA DVS results do not make a liar out of anyone.

          Lies are deliberate misrepresentations, and even today there remains good reason to continue to examine DVS results.
          But the absence of evidence from GA that DVS made systemic and deliberate changes to voting, rather than rare but onesided errors, does not make claims regarding DVS lies – just likely incorrect.

  9. It rejects the notion that it should protect the votes of these individual votes by effectively disenfranchising millions of other voters by blocking certification.

    No legally cast vote should be rejected. Votes that are provably illegal should never be counted. And if the state’s created a situation where they cannot be 100% certain votes are valid, they should not assume there are voters connected to them that will be disenfranchised. They should be rejected. If not, they are potentially disenfranchising provably valid voters at the expense of the unprovable vote.

  10. Neither Trump nor his anti democracy “lawyers” care about the law, fair dealing, legitimacy or anything else. They are examples of the kind of person who despises democracy and voters. They are the kind of lawyers who forgot the Ethics Rules as soon as the multi state bar exam on them was over. Blessed with the privilege of a law license, Trump’s “lawyers” have take aim at the heart of our country and engaged in fraud upon the court and a brutal and lie filled attack on the CONSTITUTION and the Rule of Law and ultimately on the AMERICAN People and those many Who have fought and died for it.

    The goal of all of This despicable behavior is to cause chaos and whip up violence if at all possible and turn this country into just one of many that have allowed bad and rapacious men (they generally are men.) to destroy normal life and the benefits of peaceful transitions of power for their own greed. They don’t care that people are dying from Covid or that their dream of violence will lay waste to our country. They want what they want and they don’t care who or what they destroy. I sick of it. I’m angry and disgusted.

    Disbarments, there should Be aplenty amongst the lawyers In this traveling band of liars but my great disgust is for the Republicans who created this monster( yes, he is) and continue to support him for their own power, prestige’s and greed. Trump is a symptom of who they are.

    1. “this monster( yes, he is)”

      So, are you even aware that this imaginary “monster”, is the first President in almost 40 years that did NOT start a war during a 4 year term in office?

      Ask Libyans who the real monster is, and the answer is Obama.

      You’re so spoiled and poorly educated that you have no concept of anything outside of your self-serving TDS-PTS paradigm.

      Apparently you think war is just a video game.

        1. “Trump has done much more internal harm to the US than Obama did.”

          Please elaborate with verifiable citations.

          Making emotional statements like that is what children do. Are you a child, or an adult?

          If you consider yourself an adult, then back up your statement.

        2. Ah yes Co’mrade Collective of the now newly named DNC continues to bark the Marxist Leninist vesion of The Truth.

    2. The Republicans have embraced Trump because he has become the Michael Cohen of their party, that is, he is the guy who will do its dirty work at all costs. Being a minority party, the conservatives have come to the realization that the time-honored tradition of “spinning” the truth is no longer practicable. The gulf between Science and Faith is so great nowadays that outright lying is the only way to succeed come what may. In war, truth is the first casualty. Whichever party controls the media narrative in this culture war controls the country. Fox/Newsmax/OneAmericNetwork/Infowars vs. ABC/CBS/NBC/PBS.

  11. I don’t think that the Court should have dismissed this case. While the campaign may have little chance of winning in Court, there does appear, however small, a colorable claim. A judicial decision on the claim, as opposed to a dismissal, would eliminate the concerns of many. Why, all of a sudden, do people appear fearful of finding out if there is any truth here, especially the party that has filed so many lawsuits in the last four years for political reasons (many of which should have been dismissed)?

    1. Why do you assume that Brann is fearful? He explained why he dismissed it:

      “One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.” He goes on to explain in more depth.

      If there were “any truth here,” Trump’s lawyers should have presented evidence for it.

  12. Of course Turley has been a strong and regular voice against the daily personal attacks by the Pres-Deselect over the last 4 years and has moral standing therefore for this column.

    No, no.

  13. JT: “We need to move away from these personal attacks and focus on the law. Indeed, the attacks by Giuliani on the integrity of such judges undermines his own credibility and that of his client.”

    Right. Sure. Good luck with that legal advice, Professor! When are you going to stop pretending that Trump is interested in winning in a court of law when it is patently clear by his incessant tweeting that he is interested only in winning in the court of public opinion? Stop playing naive on Fox News as if Trump and his lawyers are acting in good faith. You know they are trying to undermine the legitimacy of Biden’s presidency. Once a Birther, always a Birther.

    1. “stop pretending that Trump is interested in winning in a court of law when it is patently clear by his incessant tweeting that he is interested only in winning in the court of public opinion”

      Jeffrey, you’re very slow on the uptake.

      Trump is very interested in both winning in a court of law, and winning in the court of public opinion.

      The only one a blind partisan like you (with no critical thinking skills) should be concerned with, is the court of law.

      Public opinion is irrelevant. IOW, “This ain’t no party, this ain’t no disco, this ain’t no foolin’ around”.

      1. Trump is not going to win in a court of law. Even Turley acknowledges that it is a very long shot even if there was evidence of fraud which so far there is none. Trump is on a WITCH HUNT. His claims of “Dominion-izing” is a HOAX! There was NO COLLUSION between Democratic operatives and the vote counters. Sound familiar? You’ll forgive me if I rip a page out of Trump’s playbook.

      2. Trump is a loser. He’s always been a loser, and he’ll continue to be a loser when he goes to a New York State prison.

  14. “The decision will now permit the Trump to appeal to the Third Circuit (and potentially to the United States Supreme Court).”

    Jonathan, you are parroting the same rhetoric as some pundits did in the 2000 Bush-Gore contested election.

    There is no “potentially” about it. This is going to the SCOTUS.

    Which is where all of the sh*t will hit the fan.

    1. Rhodes, after the 3rd Circuit rules, Trump can appeal to SCOTUS, but it’s not up to Trump whether they grant cert. You shouldn’t be so certain that they will, given the actual facts of this case.

      1. Because you say so ?

        Why won’t scotus touch this ?

        There was already a 4:4 ruling on PA in October. With ACB that is likely to be 6:3. If Roberts is not the swing vote he is likely to vote with the majority.

        The open question is not whether SCOTUS takes this. Nor even that the rule against the states and election officials.

        It is only what the remedy will be.
        That is where Trump will likely be disappointed.

        Because the states failed to follow their own rules, they can not separate out and remove the invalid mailin ballots from the valid ones.

        And I do not see getting a majority of 5 votes to preclude the states from certifying their elections.
        Even though that is the only remedy that will address the problem.

        This is not about Trump. It is about Trust in out elections.

        Buy playing games with the election process and by leaving the courts with no sane remedy, you have assured that no one will trust the results of not only this election – but future ones.

        1. The earlier SC vote in Pennsylvania was about late mail-in ballots. They are separated from other mail-in ballots, are insufficient in number to undo the results if not counted, and therefore irrelevant.

          1. “The earlier SC vote in Pennsylvania was about late mail-in ballots. They are separated from other mail-in ballots, are insufficient in number to undo the results if not counted, and therefore irrelevant.”

            And you know this how ? Alito’s order was not until several days after the election. The PA election commission issued conflicting directives.

            At the Time of Alito’s order Biden was still behind.

            There are also affadavits that PA precincts changed the received date on late ballots.

            Regardless, you do not seem to understand – I do not care about whether Trump gets elected.

            I care that those like yourself responsible for this mess get exposed as the frauds they are.

            47% of voters think you stole the election. Are they right ? I do not know for sure, though I tend to think so.

            What they are right about is that you did not follow the law. That is immoral and unethical. In some cases it is also criminal.

            You have once again $hat on yourself.

            Even if you manage to get away with it, you will still be covered in the stench of fraud.

            That is what happens when you lie, you cheat, you do not follow the law.

                  1. So what are you here for ?

                    To slander all who disagree with you ?

                    Or to find the truth ?

                    That latter is attived at by facts, logic, reason – otherwise known as valid arguments.

            1. “I care that those like yourself responsible for this mess get exposed as the frauds they are.
              47% of voters think you stole the election. Are they right ? I do not know for sure, though I tend to think so.
              What they are right about is that you did not follow the law. That is immoral and unethical. In some cases it is also criminal.
              You have once again $hat on yourself.”

              John, well said once again.

  15. “Leveling up” is wonderful in theory and should certainly be the first choice. But where there is extremely limited time/opportunity to “level up” and where the numbers involved make it impossible, “leveling down” is the only reasonable remedy to plainly and admitted voter mistreatment. Yes, “leveling down” would disenfranchise plenty of Biden voters, but failing to do anything clearly disenfranchises plenty of Trump voters. Someone has to be disenfranchised and I conclude that where the mistreatment was intentionally caused by election officials who wanted to favor Biden, “leveling down” is the only fair solution.

    1. “failing to do anything clearly disenfranchises plenty of Trump voters”

      The voters whose ballots were rejected in counties that didn’t allow curing were disenfranchised by the Republican officials who chose not to allow curing in those counties. Notably, Trump didn’t sue those counties. He only sued counties where the Democratic officials allowed curing. Note, as well, that he did not sue prior to the election, even though the differences in curing decisions were public before the election. He doesn’t get to disenfranchise all of the voters in the state for his failure to act in a timely way, and you shouldn’t be calling for that either.

      1. “Notably, Trump didn’t sue those counties. He only sued counties where the Democratic officials allowed curing. ”

        On issues involving the legality of votes, it is a matter of law, procedure and strategy. I don’t know what they are thinking.

        I can’t see why they would sue those counties they felt were acting in a legal manner.

      2. No CTDHD – there is no “curing” in the law. This is a made up action by democratic administrations in these states.

        The burden of getting your vote correct is on the voter – not the election officials.

        No election official should EVER modify anything related to a ballot.

        This is not about Trump – Trump did not make this mess. YOU did, by failing to follow the law.

        Please go read PA SB421 and find the section of the law that allows democrats to do as they did.

        I would note that even if the law did allow curing – which it does not, that is a really rally really bad idea.

        Tell me how we can tell the difference between a fraudulent ballot and a valid ballot after election officials have “cured” it ?

        When information on a ballot is incorrect or missing that is a giant red flag indicating the possibility of voter fraud.

        While it is POSSIBLE that the ballot is legitimate, it is also possible that the ballot is someone trying to vote for another person, or a ballot that is not from a legitimate voter. Because our voter registration rolls are a mess – we can not tell from the rolls that the ballot is actually being cast by a legitimate voter.

        In PA if you voted by mail you could go online and check whether your ballot was received and if there was a problem it was up to you to correct it. When election officials take it on themselves to fix defective ballots – sometimes they are as you say “curing” but atleast some of the time they are facillitating a fraud.

        But the best fix for this is not to ever repeat this idiotic vote by mail nonsense.

        This trainwreck was clear miles away.

        This is typical of the left. Act without thinking. The ends justify the means. Pay no heed to the long term consequences.

        1. In 2016 there were over 200k mail in votes in Pennsylvania, a practice in the past favored more by Republicans than Democrats. Trump “won” the state by 44k, so by John’s reasoning. it is questionable if he should have been president for the last 4 years. Somehow, Hillary did not hide in her bunker and claim she was cheated and had won the election. She conceded and wished Trump well.

          John is demonstrating what losers with puny do – cry, complain, and blame it on anything other than their own failure to perform. Next time pick a candidate who’s not a pr..k.

          1. Absentee ballots are not mailin ballots.

            I voted absentee in PA in 2018.

            I had to go to the registrars office.
            Present Valid Photo ID,
            Have my signature confirmed,
            I was then given a blank ballot and two envelopes.
            I was directed to fillin in the ballot, seal it in the first envelope,
            Place that in the 2nd envelope and bring that to the registrar.
            There I sealed and signed and addressed the 2nd envelope and it was notarized by the registrar.

            Just as if I had voted at the polls, my vote was completely secret.

            I could not vote from home. There was no ability for anyone to induce or coerce me to vote in a particular way – or vote at all.
            There was no way for anyone to know how I voted.

            All things that are NOT true about mailin elections.
            All things I expect from every single vote in every election.

            I do not care who favors what.
            And I am not a republican.

          2. You continue to make this idiotic claim that I am somehow a sore loser.

            I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016. I did not want Clinton or Trump to win. I was going to lose no matter what.
            But I am still happy with my vote.

            In 2020 I voted for Jo Jo Jorganeson.
            Not Trump or Biden.

            My candidate is not likely to win in my lifetime.

            But I expect the vote to be conducted at the bare minimum following the law.

            Though I also expect that our legislators and congress will write laws that actually reduce the opportunities for Fraud.

            Republicans are better at that. But even they are not very good.

            PA SB 421 is a disaster. but as fraud prone as it was – that was not enough for the left.
            You doubled down on fraud.

            You have already been caught – whatever the courts do.

            And you keep trying to defend it.

            You even keep pushing this sore loser crap – as if I care,
            Jo Jo was not winning.

            But you lost. You might have won the election, but you shed even more of your integrity and credibility to do so.

            What is really disturbing is that you do not care. And that makes you dangerous.

      3. You do not seem to understand there will be other elections.

        Lets presume it is 2024, Mailin voting has become the norm. Curing has become the norm.

        What prevents republican political operatives from sending in ballots for every single registered voter ?

        What prevents a foriegn power from doing so ?

        You have implimented a system that is incredibly easy to defraud.

        If there was not massive fraud this time – there will be soon enough.

        And contra the left voter fraud has a long long long history – even in the US.

        If you make fraud possible – it will happen.

        Next time it may be you that is the victim ?

        Need I remind you of the consequences of ending the filibuster ?

        1. John is mouthing off, apparently ignorant of the fact that millions of mail-in ballots were sent in 2016 and some states – Washington, Oregon since 1998 – do all elections by mail. Traditionally this has been a practice used more often by Republicans than Democrats. But hey, lose and election and losers are going to look for excuses other than the candidate they ran.

          1. I am aware that a few other states do mailin elections and have for a long time.

            Those that have done so for a long time have processes that are less fraud prone than states that jumped into this in 2020.

            but even so – why does the fact that a few states have run elections corruptly for decades mean that the rest should ?

            Washington and Oregon are Blue states and have been for a long time.

            Republicans favor absentee ballots – not mailin elections.

            And I am STILL not a republican.

            Mailin elections do not meet the criteria

            Here is an article on the history of secret ballots.
            Since you seem to be clueless.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_ballot

    2. Wiseoldlawyer, Leveling up or leveling down is the crux of the issue. This problem was created by the Democrat demand for mail-in voting while preventing the necessary protection preventing voter dilution. The underlying cause of this entire fiasco is the Democrat Party’s attempt to gain power, whether it be by spying on a President, impeaching a President, cheating, ballot harvesting, or whatever.

      The Democrats had no concern for the Constitution or integrity. Now the only solution is in the courts. Whether a person is a Democrat or Republican, they are being denied their voter integrity and their voices by the Democrat Party.

      We hear one commenter continuously complaining that the evidence hasn’t been chewed up and digested enough for that commenter’s satisfaction. That commenter looks at only one side of the equation and seldom bothers with the other or the realities that exist.

      The answer to all questions will come from the SC. Everything occurring beforehand is to get the arguments in front of the SC. That means specific oral arguments, whether ready or not, have to be presented to the lower courts. It’s an uphill road for Trump, but not impossible.

      The question raised is what will happen after the SC decides? If it is a Trump victory, we can expect to see rioting in the streets by the same people who have been rioting until now. If it is a Democrat victory, there may still be rioting in the streets by the same people though it will be less. Democrats have done nothing to quell the violence in our streets. Should Biden win, he might be negotiating issues central to the survival of America and doing so while mentally impaired and integrity under question. That will be a dangerous mixture in the years to come.

    3. The correct solution – which I doubt SCOTUS will do, is to order states that failed to follow their own rules, not to certify their elections.

      That would throw this into the house of representatives.

      But the gigantic problem is that there is absolutely no remedy at all at this point that does not leave close to 50% of the country convinced the results are not legitimate.

      The right solution is to revote the election – following the laws (not edicts of governors) in each state scrupulously.

      But there is not a change in h3ll of that occuring – it is not constitutional.

      The next best alternative – also highly unlikely is a constitutional convention to propose counstitutional amendments to deal with this in the future.

      The first would be that all voting must be by secret ballot – that would invalidate mailin voting – good riddance, there is absolutely no means to make mailin voting trustworthy.

      But again this is unlikely.

      Regardless, Biden’s presidency is going to be crippled by this – as if it did not have all kinds of problems to begin with.

      Democrats are likely to get obliterated in 2022.

      Who knows Trump may run again in 2024 – if he did I have little doubt he would win.
      And if he does not someone Trump like will be the GOP candidate and they will win.

      Democrats and the left do not understand the bad taste they have left.

      For good reason no one trusts the media or the left. or democrats.

      That is extremely hard to get back.

      The more dangerous scenario – which is possible is anything from real violence from the right, to open rebellion by the right.

      While the latter is unlikely at this time, the former is highly likely.

      Even frequent large scale armed protests by the right are quite possible.

      Antifa has made it clear their are going to do violence to anyone else protesting.
      That means Republicans protesting will have to be armed.

Leave a Reply