• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge rejects Green Party's PA recount

How did trump get it stopped?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

yeah trump didn't stop it. The court stopped it due to lack of evidence.
 
http://6abc.com/politics/judge-rejects-green-partys-pennsylvania-recount-case/1651954/

"Most importantly, there is no credible evidence that any 'hack' occurred, and compelling evidence that Pennsylvania's voting system was not in any way compromised," Diamond wrote. He also said the lawsuit suffered from a lack of standing, potentially the lack of federal jurisdiction and an "unexplained, highly prejudicial" wait before filing last week's lawsuit.


This disaster of a mess is finally over.

Wi is almost done with Hillary gaining only 25 votes.
a federal judge threw out the MI recount
and another federal judge just through out PA recount.

So Hillary lost twice just as expected. Thank goodness we didn't use that money for something important or donate it to a charity for the holidays!
 
So Hillary lost twice just as expected. Thank goodness we didn't use that money for something important or donate it to a charity for the holidays!

yea the people that gave her those millions should sue for fraud.
 
The judge and the AG for the state have stated they would not be able to complete the recount.

They had between three and four weeks from the time Stein requested a recount until the day the EC votes had to be submitted.

Just how did the judge and Attorney general know for sure they could not have accomplished recount when they had no such experience doing so?
 
So Trump or his representatives played no role in this matter according to you?

What role did his representatives play - post factual and verifiable evidence.
 
What role did his representatives play - post factual and verifiable evidence.

I guess the democrat AG and the democrat chairman of elections was in on it as well because they were defendants in the lawsuit as well.
stein should have to pay the court costs for this whole debacle she caused for no reason.
 
Last edited:
Hmm... as opposed to some loon "actively" demanding the recount of an entire state in under a week out of curiosity. ;)

I have to side with the judge on this one.


Appointed to the bench by GW Bush.

Recall the 2000 Bush Family Election in Florida.

Almost all of youse guyz hollered when an Obama appointed federal judge in MI ordered the recount. But now this order not to count is good...good judge, nice judge, sit judge.
 
What role did his representatives play - post factual and verifiable evidence.

you need to inform one of your allies here then


Quote Originally Posted by NonoBadDog View Post
The judge stopped the recount, not Trump.

Pretending that Trump was a bystander and the judge did it all is utter nonsense. In reality Trump fought it. And in doing so - in an election he claimed was rigged and in which millions of illegal votes were cast - he is then part of covering up possible evidence that he is afraid of.
 
Appointed to the bench by GW Bush.

Recall the 2000 Bush Family Election in Florida.

Almost all of youse guyz hollered when an Obama appointed federal judge in MI ordered the recount. But now this order not to count is good...good judge, nice judge, sit judge.

so once again proven no evidence of fraud or hacking.
care to recant your arguments so far or just continue with them?

actually the MI judge ruled the count should have never been considered.
A federal judge ordered the recount to start instead of the 2 day delay that they were going to do.

that same judge then up held a MI appeals court ruling to toss the case and stop the recount based on lack of evidence and
standing.
 
you need to inform one of your allies here then

You're above reply is incoherent. Want to try again?


Pretending that Trump was a bystander and the judge did it all is utter nonsense. In reality Trump fought it. And in doing so - in an election he claimed was rigged and in which millions of illegal votes were cast - he is then part of covering up possible evidence that he is afraid of.

You asked a question - perhaps you erased it, but your question was something along the lines of "Do you think Trump or his representatives weren't involved"..... So I asked the question of YOU, who you claim was involved. You claim it's "utter nonsense" Trump was a bystander so .... I'll ask again, post evidence that's verifiable who was involved from Trump's side.

Since you know it's utter nonsense, you MUST have easy facts at your fingertips to inform us all.
emot-smug.gif
 
Appointed to the bench by GW Bush.

Recall the 2000 Bush Family Election in Florida.

Almost all of youse guyz hollered when an Obama appointed federal judge in MI ordered the recount. But now this order not to count is good...good judge, nice judge, sit judge.

Why bother to quote a post and then rant about something else entirely? This thread, much less my post, is not about a different recount request, in a different state, at a different time and being decided by a different judge.

You ignore the impracticality of doing a statewide (manual?) recount within a week being requested based on nothing but a suspicion of some possible, yet unnamed, anomaly.
 
You're above reply is incoherent. Want to try again?




You asked a question - perhaps you erased it, but your question was something along the lines of "Do you think Trump or his representatives weren't involved"..... So I asked the question of YOU, who you claim was involved. You claim it's "utter nonsense" Trump was a bystander so .... I'll ask again, post evidence that's verifiable who was involved from Trump's side.

Since you know it's utter nonsense, you MUST have easy facts at your fingertips to inform us all.
emot-smug.gif

I am sure trump had his lawyers there in order to defend the case, but stein was the one involved with the whole thing.

even the AG of PA was wanting the case dismissed.
 
You asked a question - perhaps you erased it, but your question was something along the lines of "Do you think Trump or his representatives weren't involved"..... So I asked the question of YOU, who you claim was involved. You claim it's "utter nonsense" Trump was a bystander so .... I'll ask again, post evidence that's verifiable who was involved from Trump's side.

Since you know it's utter nonsense, you MUST have easy facts at your fingertips to inform us all.
emot-smug.gif

I thought you kept up on these matters?

In Response to Stein Recount, Trump Reps Now Claim No Evidence of Voter Fraud | Law News

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...-join-fight-against-pennsylvania-recount-suit
 
Hm... so the names of "Trumps lawyers" then? That's not verifiable.... I thought you understood what "verifiable" meant.

I provided verifiable evidence of the Trump involvement. Amount my burden of proof.

You want more - you do your own damn search.

I could not care less.
 
You have to wonder why Trump worked so hard to stop or prevent recounts in both Michigan and Pennsylvania and what he was afraid was going to emerge from those recounts?

This doubt - caused by his own actions - simply increases the ugly stain of illegitimacy upon the Trump presidency.

no, you have to wonder that.

I have to wonder what medicines you are on.
 
I provided verifiable evidence of the Trump involvement. Amount my burden of proof.
His? Who is the "he" you describe? What's the lawyers names... you don't know because the article doesn't name them. Trump himself wasn't there. So you've provided nothing.

That's what I thought. Thanks!
 
Why bother to quote a post and then rant about something else entirely? This thread, much less my post, is not about a different recount request, in a different state, at a different time and being decided by a different judge.

You ignore the impracticality of doing a statewide (manual?) recount within a week being requested based on nothing but a suspicion of some possible, yet unnamed, anomaly.

His whole argument has been this is fraud and hacking.
he was given plenty of info as to why this was not correct and ignored all of it.

it has been proven in at least 2 states that nothing sinister occurred.

the only reason the WI judge didn't throw it out was that it was almost done.
even in that recount Clinton only gain 20-60 votes while losing by 22k.
 
His? Who is the "he" you describe? What's the lawyers names... you don't know because the article doesn't name them. Trump himself wasn't there. So you've provided nothing.

That's what I thought. Thanks!

I provided the evidence of Trumps legal involvement in the effort to stop the Pennsylvania recount.

You know - for most of us this stuff is NOT rocket science and I have to wonder why it is so difficult for you to locate what I can find in mere seconds?

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...recount-to-line-her-pockets-trump-lawyer-says
 
His whole argument has been this is fraud and hacking.
he was given plenty of info as to why this was not correct and ignored all of it.

it has been proven in at least 2 states that nothing sinister occurred.

the only reason the WI judge didn't throw it out was that it was almost done.
even in that recount Clinton only gain 20-60 votes while losing by 22k.

That doesn't follow with the alt-left narrative. There MUST be something there.

I provided the evidence of Trumps legal involvement in the effort to stop the Pennsylvania recount.

You know - for most of us this stuff is NOT rocket science and I have to wonder why it is so difficult for you to locate what I can find in mere seconds?

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...recount-to-line-her-pockets-trump-lawyer-says

Already addressed... Post #70.
I thought you "could not care less". Apparently that's not true either.
 
That doesn't follow with the alt-left narrative. There MUST be something there.
.

it is obvious that he was proven wrong. he won't even respond to my post pointing that out.
 
Already addressed... Post #70.
I thought you "could not care less". Apparently that's not true either.

Am I now suppose to apologize for proving you wrong just to ease your own anger at being shown up?
 
Back
Top Bottom