Judge rejects Green Party's PA recount

[haymarket]

Funny you don't have an opinion on that.



Who fought it? Oh yes, the nameless lawyers.... how much money did it take to fight it? What court records and what motions were issued by these nameless lawyers to fight it? Since it was done, as you say, in public there's a public record you no doubt have already reviewed and want to post.

Why do you insist on being so blatantly dishonest when you were already provided with the article with a Trump attorneys name when you so self righteously insisted upon it?

 

[VanceMack]

Until we examine the entire process we really do not know who is the winner and who is the loser when so many serious questions have been raised. Trump could have had some of these answered via the recounts. But he fought them tooth and nail.

So what is he afraid of emerging from these recounts?

Look at it this way. Lets say someone suggested that while they dont have any direct evidence you are a child molester, they want to conduct a complete and thorough investigation going through every electronic device, every address book, every contract, your fed contract, every personal contact, every email address you have ever used, all of your digital media in your home and they want to review every phot album, DVD, and other recording all to ensure that you are not in fact a child molester (with the understanding up front that there is no actual evidence that you are a child molester...just that they want to make SURE you arent a child molester).

You'd be cool with that...right? You wouldnt object to your name being associated with child molesters for weeks and you wouldnt mind if any time your name came up, people remembered...oh yeah...wasnt he that guy that was a child molester? Oh...no...he wasnt convicted of being a child molester. They found irregularities but not enough evidence to PROVE he was a child molester. So no...they never PROVED anything. But you know...that could mean anything.

Thats what this whole thing has been about. There was never a question as to the result. It was nothing but an attempt to try to smear him and cast doubt on his election. And you are eating it up with a spoon. So...would you be similarly OK with your name being associated with an investigation.

And for the record...I am not in ANY way insinuating that you ARE a child molester.

 

[NonoBadDog]

The rest of it was irrelevant next to that first sentence.

I would expect you to think the answer that I gave you would be irrelevant. It's called "denial".

Oh, and good news. Wisconsin is done with their recount. Trump gained 131 votes.

PA is in down the tubes. Mich is down the tubes and Trump gained in Wisconsin.

 

[haymarket]

I would expect you to think the answer that I gave you would be irrelevant. It's called "denial".

Oh, and good news. Wisconsin is done with their recount. Trump gained 131 votes.

Denied nothing. I confronted your post directly head on.

 

[humbolt]

Only in your mind.

Illegitimate calls for recounts by a person with no standing. Why shouldn't Trump have come out against this purposeful attempt to rob him of his lawful victory?

That's being presumptive. You're assuming there is one. I seriously doubt it.

 

[TOJ]

Denied nothing. I confronted your post directly head on.

Heavens to Murgatroyd. You lost. Whining will not change anything. You would be more productive if you go to your safe space, curl up in a fetal position, and suck your thumb for the next four years. :doh

.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Liberals will never accept the fact that they were beaten by the uneducated.

All that presumed brainpower gone to waste.

:lamo

 

[haymarket]

Heavens to Murgatroyd. You lost. Whining will not change anything. You would be more productive if you go to your safe space, curl up in a fetal position, and suck your thumb for the next four years. :doh

.

I did not run for anything so I could not have lost.

Tell me something though --- at what point in the next four years will the Trump devotees actually try to discuss issues without screaming WE WON WE WON WE WON every time they are challenged on something ?

 

[ludin]

I would expect you to think the answer that I gave you would be irrelevant. It's called "denial".

Oh, and good news. Wisconsin is done with their recount. Trump gained 131 votes.

PA is in down the tubes. Mich is down the tubes and Trump gained in Wisconsin.

it was over weeks ago.
they still can't accept the results.

 

[TOJ]

I did not run for anything so I could not have lost.

You have shown throughout this thread and also in others that you lost. :doh

Tell me something though --- at what point in the next four years will the Trump devotees actually try to discuss issues without screaming WE WON WE WON WE WON every time they are challenged on something ?

You would have to ask them but I'm guessing they will be screaming WE WON as long as idiots are still suggesting they didn't. :Shrug:

.

 

[Grim17]

Here is the Michigan law

Stein clearly qualifies as any candidate who believes as her belief is totally up to her and nobody else. It does not say you have to finish second or have a chance at winning.

Stein was only 2,228,080 votes shy of winning the state... LMMFAO

.

 

[ludin]

Stein was only 2,228,080 votes shy of winning the state... LMMFAO

.

The state appeals court said that given the severity of her loss she couldn't be considered and aggrieved candidate.
a federal judge said that it wasn't his job to interpret aggrieved for the state and stopped it.

 

[Ockham]

Why do you insist on being so blatantly dishonest when you were already provided with the article with a Trump attorneys name when you so self righteously insisted upon it?

So still no opinion. Just nameless lawyers, no public records but you claim it was fought by Trump in public, and no motions ..... so basically you're saying you have nada. I simply want facts and your posts are bereft of them; not surprising really. You may want to stop digging now. Up to you.

 

[haymarket]

Stein was only 2,228,080 votes shy of winning the state... LMMFAO

.

So what? The Michigan law says nothing about that being a necessity for a recount.

 

[haymarket]

So still no opinion. Just nameless lawyers, no public records but you claim it was fought by Trump in public, and no motions ..... so basically you're saying you have nada. I simply want facts and your posts are bereft of them; not surprising really. You may want to stop digging now. Up to you.

you were given an article which named a Trump lawyer. You were given a few articles with the very facts you challenged me to present. And then you play ostrich and pretend you did not see any of it.

Why are you being so blatantly dishonest?

And that is a rhetorical question as we both know the answer?

 

[Ockham]

you were given an article which named a Trump lawyer. You were given a few articles with the very facts you challenged me to present. And then you play ostrich and pretend you did not see any of it.

Why are you being so blatantly dishonest?

See you could do it, you found one of the lawyers names. Good for you! How about the one's in Michigan on the Dec 5th article. Was that Tabas as well and the article there said there were more than one (lawyers). And really, you've never been much of a challenge but it's interesting you think that way!

How about all those public filings eh? It took you what, four or five hours to find one of the lawyers names finally, maybe another week or two and you'll get some actual facts and filing information. I know, it's the courts fault, they're so slow.

 

[VanceMack]

So we see the next phase. The recount failed miserably both to otherthrow the state decisions AND to lend any credence to the narrative that he is not REALLY the winner. So now...on to phase 2 and 3 to be run concurrently.

Phase 2-Attack the electoral college and attempt to sway EC voters.

Phase 3-Plant innuendo about 'The Russians' and start offering the suggestion that...really...for everyones sake we should have another election. You know...for the good of the people. Come on...what could it hurt? Who could object to it...UNLESS...in their heart of hearts they KNOW the Russians fixed the election!!!

This wont be over til at least the inauguration and even then the leftists will be cranking up the war machine, trying to protest and disrupt the country at every turn.

 

[trouble13]

you need to inform one of your allies here then




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.

1. Did trump send lawyers to argue against a recount? If not he was a bystander

2. Recounting the vote only confirms the count was correct in those select precincts but it does not verify the votes were legitimate. The count can be correct and the election can still of been rigged.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[j-mac]

I did not run for anything so I could not have lost.

Tell me something though --- at what point in the next four years will the Trump devotees actually try to discuss issues without screaming WE WON WE WON WE WON every time they are challenged on something ?

When y'all accept the results.....

 

[haymarket]

See you could do it, you found one of the lawyers names.

are you in some time warp where you are hours behind everyone else?

 

[Ockham]

are you in some time warp where you are hours behind everyone else?

Is that important to the topic at hand?

Still no filings eh? Oh well... maybe in a few weeks then, you know since this is all done in the public view and all.

 

[haymarket]

Is that important to the topic at hand?

What is even more important is why you are being so blatantly dishonest about this entire issue? You were given evidence and then ignored it for hours and in the interim making smart remarks of an insulting nature.

Why do you do this?

 

[trouble13]

I did not run for anything so I could not have lost.

Tell me something though --- at what point in the next four years will the Trump devotees actually try to discuss issues without screaming WE WON WE WON WE WON every time they are challenged on something ?

If it takes the same amount of time as obamas people to stop gloating over their victory, you have a long wait ahead of you.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Ockham]

When y'all accept the results.....

Elections have consequences... Trump won but they won't get over it. The alt-left doesn't do that.

 

[Ockham]

What is even more important is why you are being so blatantly dishonest about this entire issue? You were given evidence and then ignored it for hours and in the interim making smart remarks of an insulting nature.

Why do you do this?

You claim certainty - I just want the facts. You claim facts I do this so you will share. But you don't share because you don't have the facts. You found one name in four hours, you don't get a pat on the back for that. I like smart remarks because they out your lack of preparedness to discuss the topic, they also provide anyone else reading this the insight that your posts have zero credibility. Your accusation of dishonesty is a defense reflex.

So, given all this public information, when are you going to provide something other than one of Trumps lawyers name, who I might add, you cannot even say was part of the Michigan or Wisconsin recount? The dishonesty here sir, is yours.