Here's the thing. I have no way of knowing whether the election was stolen or not - I was not a poll worker. But we do live in America where innocence is presumed until proven guilty.
So as an American, I presume that there was no massive fraud occurring. There is evidence backing that there was not - polls taken beforehand, the watchers from both parties, the steps set in place to prevent fraud, and past precedent. But such evidence does not need to be presented.
Trump, if he wants to cry fraud, must present solid evidence. Showing a spike in Biden votes at a time when city mail-in ballots were released and saying "See, fraud!" does not cut it. And if he presents solid evidence, then I'll believe him.
If Trump stays in the white house in any other fashion, then we can truly say that American is no longer a Democracy, nor is it a Republic.
A lot of Republicans and Trumpers seem completely unaware of what the protections in place are so they make bullshit up on the spot not knowing there are very easy ways to check if the claims are true or not.
Eg they claim more people voting in districts than registered voters, like they somehow don't think both those numbers are available to be checked? Or even saying the Dominion machines are flipping votes to Biden whilst ignoring the fact that, when you vote the machine prints off who you voted for that you then check and give to the election official and it is stored. If the machine flipped votes you'd either see it on the printoff or when they compare the electronic tally to the paper tally, they wouldn't match up. Neither happened, both have been checked yet still they make that claim...
Trumpers have completely taken leave of their senses.
Just because SOME republicans believe the elections got faked doesnt mean ALL or even just an important part of republicans would believe so.
Just because SOME democrats believe Trump would make a coupe doesnt mean it would happen. Trump has no basis for a coup. He is downright unpopular with the police and military. And his attempts to fight the election in court do not qualify for being a coup in the first place.
Its not an equal sides of the coin. Donald Trump, a wildly unpopular president who has done everything in his power to ensure that he's not re-elected. So when he loses the election, its time to claim that democrats stole it even though republicans practically control all the state legislation.
- States will certify the winners. Just like Georgia just did after a recount. - The electoral college will meet on 14 December and cast their votes based on the mandate received from voters in each state. It will probably go 306 - 232 to Biden. - Joe Biden will be inaugurated as the 46th president of the United States on 21 January 2021.
MAGA twats will continue to have meltdowns at each and every one of these stages, but it won’t change the inevitable. Eventually, people will move on and start thinking about 2022 midterms and especially what happens in 2024. The smarter end of Trump-supporters on this forum have already accepted the defeat and have their sights on the future instead.
The military won't allow Trump to attempt a coup. What is happening is not unprecedented. In the election of 2000 Al Gore didn't concede until Dec 13th and up until that point everyone thought he was going to win. Then the Supreme Court stepped in put an end to that nonsense. The way things are going with the 2020 election it will likely end up in the supreme court again. Trump might end up being declared the winner as unlikely as that sounds. Though they might end up ruling in favor of Biden if fraud / errors can't be proven. So who knows. It won't be a coup though.
People in this country need to stop blaming either side and start asking the questions: We are the average people, is our entire government corrupt? Not just their side but what about my side? Question everything.
Evidence, in law, any of the material items or assertions of fact that may be submitted to a competent tribunal as a means of ascertaining the truth of any alleged matter of fact under investigation before it.
Here's from another ruling, from another case thrown out earlier today:
“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,” he wrote in his 37-page opinion. “Instead, this court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations … unsupported by the evidence.” - U.S. District Judge Matthew W. Brann, Republican.
They couldn't even get a right wing judge to throw them a bone, and accept their non-evidence. 😂
Maybe (I haven't looked them up yet)? Brann actually was appointed by Obama under the recommendation by Republican Senator Pat Toomey, even though he's a very right wing Republican Judge, and a Federalist. Obama did things like that during his term to promote unity.
The difference is the Post-Master General's tampering of the election and the the fake mail-in ballot request forms (sent by Republicans) was proven/presented in court. Also things like the fake mail-in boxes that were placed by Republicans were admitted to. www.washingtonpost.com/nation/…
Trumps lawyers however are 1 in 32 about proving anything in court, and the one court case they did win didn't get rid of any votes (it just allowed observers to come within 6 feet of the vote counters). All the mountains of "evidence" they claim to have were never brought into court at all...not even once, and when asked directly by the same courts to produce their evidence, Trumps lawyers said they didn't have any. Huh?
Many cases thrown out by Democrat judges, by the way. Pennsylvania Supreme Court, for example, is 5-2 Democrat (yes, actual DEMOCRAT) majority, and their latest ruling was 5-2 against Trump campaign. Color me surprised.
How about the just recent ruling of Pennsylvania appeals court Judge Stephanos Bibas (who is a Trump appointee as were the other 2 judges in the panel) who just said, "Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here"
As I have said before, conservative judges are not reliable. They too often care about the "image" of their institution than the constitutional implications. He's apparently one of them, just like Roberts. Meanwhile a judge in Nevada is "allowing" Trump's campaign to present evidence of fraud, stuffing, theft, destruction of ballots, etc. No judge should ever have to "allow" evidence if there are serious allegations. Should always encourage evidence to be shown, permission be damned.
Activist judges. Institutionalist judges. Take your pick. I bet you can't wait for the next conservative judge to do something like this.
Nah, I'm just waiting for that Judge in Nevada to eventually do the same thing. It's not like the Trump lawyers have caused any court to throw away votes yet in any of the 37 court appearances they've had so far. Though I am curious how many more court losses till you concede that they really didn't have any evidence.
He was in court just a few days ago. He didn't produce any of that "evidence" to it. I'm highly doubting he really has any. In fact, he stated specifically that he did not allege fraud as a matter of law and that “this is not a fraud case.”
According to their press conferences they allege fraud, yet in court they say they don't. According to their press conferences they have dirt on hunter Biden, where is that? According to their press conferences Trump won by 7 million votes, according to their press conferences Hugo Chavez was part of a plan to rig to voting machines, according to their press conferences the president has never lied nor has the whitehouse press secretary.
Haven't you got the message yet? They lie through their fucking teeth to the public. How can you still take anything they say in public at face value?