If you aren't paying attention to Arizona...

[DevilsFan]

Hillsy, you cannot say there WASN'T any election fraud...because there was. According to these judges that have ruled against there being enough to change an election, well, I guess that's their opinion.

Problem is not one judge has demanded a major forensic audit.

But, whatever. The Hillsy's of the world seem to be winning the legal wars. If that's the world they want to live in then they can have it. I will never fight for anyone who bows down to what's, blatantly obvious, political corruption.

[Designer]

Designer, you are mistaken. My prison daddy monicker was given to me by the moderators for OWNING people who were wrong.

So sorry, Timmy. You were given that Moniker because you incessantly Argued/Bickered TRYING to own others. All that bickering was correctly seen as you TRYING TO make yourself,...."Be Right". All made especially Laughably Ridiculous when everyone saw you were WRONG, .....but,....you still kept on bickering.

Doing so as you did earned A Following of over two dozen other Board Members who,..."Had Your Number"...and disdained you and your "actions" ......and you knew it.

You knew your Prison Daddy Reputation was so really bad because when you came over here?,...you deliberately hid your Actual Identity when you joined. UN-like everyone else who joined here.

So,...cut the crap Timmy,....you aren't going to get away with your Bullshitting Us over here like you did on The Purple Board.

[hillsy v2]

Hillsy, you cannot say there WASN'T any election fraud...because there was. According to these judges that have ruled against there being enough to change an election, well, I guess that's their opinion.

DF - you are right- and I am not saying that there was "never" any election fraud. The issue is - and has always been - is the fraud ENOUGH to sway the results. It's like the Mules thing - all this fluff about hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes and all they could actually prove was like 4 votes in the primary.....

And I don't get where you and RK seem to think I revel in this? If I am happy with anything here it's the fact that this stuff DOES get investigated. I'm sorry the results of that aren't what you guys want to hear...but there had been a legal process followed to assess the allegations.

[DevilsFan]

DF - you are right- and I am not saying that there was "never" any election fraud. The issue is - and has always been - is the fraud ENOUGH to sway the results. It's like the Mules thing - all this fluff about hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes and all they could actually prove was like 4 votes in the primary.....

And I don't get where you and RK seem to think I revel in this? If I am happy with anything here it's the fact that this stuff DOES get investigated. I'm sorry the results of that aren't what you guys want to hear...but there had been a legal process followed to assess the allegations.

Well, I will admit that you're right on that aspect...it's our legal system and, whether there's a corrupt judge or not, we abide by what system we have. Difficult to put things into the hand (or mind) of one judge to determine outcomes and it's only natural that they interpret the laws the way they do. So it is in our Constitution that we give up our freedoms to put in the judges hand's.

[Tbeck]

DF, it's not a matter of the judge's opinion in this case, it was a matter of evidence. Basically you had three arguments put forward; employees injected family ballots. No proof that happened. Secondly that printer issues prevented votes, which again there wasn't evidence of wrong doing. Lastly the chain of custody issue. Which the recorder did admit, BUT lake's legal team failed to demonstrate that had any impact on the election outcome.
So the judge didn't arrive at the dismissal by opinions, he did so by way of evidence, or lack of in this case.

This is the problem with these election case's, you must have evidence, and that doesn't mean sworn affidavits. Those are just hearsay and the opposite side could get just as many opposing. Unfortunately too many Americans think court is like what they see on TV and that isn't the case.

I don't believe that lake's team even thought they could win. This was purely spotlighting because they didn't bring evidence.

[Designer]

DF - you are right- and I am not saying that there was "never" any election fraud. The issue is - and has always been - is the fraud ENOUGH to sway the results. It's like the Mules thing - all this fluff about hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes and all they could actually prove was like 4 votes in the primary.....And I don't get where you and RK seem to think I revel in this? If I am happy with anything here it's the fact that this stuff DOES get investigated. I'm sorry the results of that aren't what you guys want to hear...but there had been a legal process followed to assess the allegations.

Well, I will admit that you're right on that aspect...it's our legal system and, whether there's a corrupt judge or not, we abide by what system we have. Difficult to put things into the hand (or mind) of one judge to determine outcomes and it's only natural that they interpret the laws the way they do. So it is in our Constitution that we give up our freedoms to put in the judges hand's.

There is plenty of evidence(s)/information that points to fraud on a level that CAN be enough to change an election. Other than a small handful of instances, that information/evidences has been deliberately ignored/dismissed/sidelined and not acted up on adequately to find out just how much the fraud affected elections. In most of those instances, the Elites already in power were the ones who in charge of the audits.
So there is virtually NO CHANCE they are going to find that the election didn't result as THEY WANTED.

There's several methods used to steal the election, most of which have already been exposed and posted herein. The Bottom line is that not only has the Elites in power developed a complex system of Stealing, they also have those in the Legal system to block/dismiss/rule against the Clear Evidences Discovered. Thus no deeper, more encompassing audits to look for more evidences of their "systems" are not possible.

[RoadKing]

Well, I will admit that you're right on that aspect...it's our legal system and, whether there's a corrupt judge or not, we abide by what system we have. Difficult to put things into the hand (or mind) of one judge to determine outcomes and it's only natural that they interpret the laws the way they do. So it is in our Constitution that we give up our freedoms to put in the judges hand's.

Amazing statement. “It’s in the Constitution to give up our freedoms”. Tell ya what, DF, drop your linens, bend over, spread your cheeks… it’s ok with you because the commies are wiping their asses with the Constitution? It ain’t alright with me and a whole lot of other people. We are at a breaking point.

Just because a lefty judge says there is no evidence you believe and accept it as law? In the earl 40’s your thinking would have described you as a “good German”, and you see how that weak compliant thinking destroyed millions of lives. History repeats.

[DevilsFan]

Well, I will admit that you're right on that aspect...it's our legal system and, whether there's a corrupt judge or not, we abide by what system we have. Difficult to put things into the hand (or mind) of one judge to determine outcomes and it's only natural that they interpret the laws the way they do. So it is in our Constitution that we give up our freedoms to put in the judges hand's.

Amazing statement. “It’s in the Constitution to give up our freedoms”. Tell ya what, DF, drop your linens, bend over, spread your cheeks… it’s ok with you because the commies are wiping their asses with the Constitution? It ain’t alright with me and a whole lot of other people. We are at a breaking point.

Just because a lefty judge says there is no evidence you believe and accept it as law? In the earl 40’s your thinking would have described you as a “good German”, and you see how that weak compliant thinking destroyed millions of lives. History repeats.

You're missing my point. We, according to our Constitution, have placed some of our freedoms in the hands of judges. Had to be this way, thus the Judicial Branch of our government.

Secondly, and I've been saying this since day one, until there are sizeable militias organizing and ready to (starting peacefully) make that walk towards D.C., but are also ready and willing to pull the triggers if necessary then ABSOLUTELY NOTHING will change in or about our government.
Playing by the laws is following the Constitution. But when the rule makers are corrupt then, even in the Constitution, it states we have the RIGHT to replace said government.
Problem is, the VAST MAJORITY are more worried about having enough battery life on their cell phones so they can post TikTok videos. THAT'S what matters to them the most.

[DevilsFan]

So the judge didn't arrive at the dismissal by opinions, he did so by way of evidence, or lack of in this case.

My point is that this statement can be subjective. What happens in Lake's appeal if the next judge DOES rule there's enough evidence? Subjective.

[Designer]

So the judge didn't arrive at the dismissal by opinions, he did so by way of evidence, or lack of in this case.

My point is that this statement can be subjective. What happens in Lake's appeal if the next judge DOES rule there's enough evidence? Subjective.

Haven't we seen this sort of scenario recently?
One judge overrules the decision of the other, but there is endless appeals, Etc. So the Election Stealing Methods,.. and what results from all that,....still gets shielded from In Depth Examination and Revelation.

[RoadKing]

Well, I will admit that you're right on that aspect...it's our legal system and, whether there's a corrupt judge or not, we abide by what system we have. Difficult to put things into the hand (or mind) of one judge to determine outcomes and it's only natural that they interpret the laws the way they do. So it is in our Constitution that we give up our freedoms to put in the judges hand's.

Amazing statement. “It’s in the Constitution to give up our freedoms”. Tell ya what, DF, drop your linens, bend over, spread your cheeks… it’s ok with you because the commies are wiping their asses with the Constitution? It ain’t alright with me and a whole lot of other people. We are at a breaking point.

Just because a lefty judge says there is no evidence you believe and accept it as law? In the earl 40’s your thinking would have described you as a “good German”, and you see how that weak compliant thinking destroyed millions of lives. History repeats.

You're missing my point. We, according to our Constitution, have placed some of our freedoms in the hands of judges. Had to be this way, thus the Judicial Branch of our government.

Secondly, and I've been saying this since day one, until there are sizeable militias organizing and ready to (starting peacefully) make that walk towards D.C., but are also ready and willing to pull the triggers if necessary then ABSOLUTELY NOTHING will change in or about our government.
Playing by the laws is following the Constitution. But when the rule makers are corrupt then, even in the Constitution, it states we have the RIGHT to replace said government.
Problem is, the VAST MAJORITY are more worried about having enough battery life on their cell phones so they can post TikTok videos. THAT'S what matters to them the most.

I’m not missing your point. I find it invalid. Why? Here is why…

Our Republic cannot survive in a corrupt lawless condition. That’s a fact. “A Republic if you can keep it”. Like it or not, believe it or nay, our Republic was founded with the knowledge that it is based upon moral and spiritual values, values that are not “subjective”, the loss of these values spells doom. The loss of these values is why our country is declining.

Militias? Bullshit. Going to DC? Bullshit. That option is no longer viable. Think Jan 6, 2001. No one needs that shit any more. Militias? Bullshit. Rather, think of the people in the vast area of rural America and they are going nowhere, especially not to DC. When the fabric finally snaps, the cities, including DC, will see terrible civil violence and flames and rural America will stay home, in their communities with family and abundance of locally produced food stuff. If you think the majority of Americans are only interested in their gadgets, you are thinking like a typical city boy.

[RoadKing]

Double post. Disregard. Rather, read above post.

[Designer]

This is the problem with these election case's,...... you must have evidence, and that doesn't mean sworn affidavits. Those are just hearsay ....

WRONG. Those affidavits about the election cases are Not all,...."just hearsay". Most all the Sworn Affidavits about the Election FRAUD since the 2020 election were persons giving Eyewitness Testimony Of Actions/Events They Saw First Hand,.....not hearsay of what they heard from another person/source.

And,..Affidavits Are Evidence; Here,.... let ME... Educate YOU.

The main purpose of an affidavit is to provide evidence in a court of law. It acts as an assurance or guarantees that it was written under oath, hence the name ‘affidavit‘.

Can affidavit be used as evidence?

Affidavits are used in courts all the time. When a witness swears to tell the truth about what he saw before he testifies, he’s swearing out an affidavit. An affidavit can also be used as evidence in court ......if the person swearing out the affidavit cannot be present to testify. Depositions are similar to affidavits — they are statements made under oath — but depositions are made outside of court and affidavits are written statements sworn to in front of a notary public.

Affidavits are legal documents and may be submitted as evidence in a court case. In criminal cases, they may be used as part of plea bargaining negotiations. In civil cases, affidavits may be used during discovery or as part of a motion before trial, or even as evidence at trial.


https://strictlylegal.in/what-is-an-aff ... -evidence/

So, next time?.......To avoid humiliating yourself AGAIN?,.....Try Knowing What You Are Talking About.

[Herb]

Comments have been made about if there is enough fraud to sway the election. People putting this kind of shit about ignoring the crime out should be in jail themselves as accomplices.

What the hell folks, ALL election/voter fraud, no matter how small needs to be investigated and proscuted. If it is't then the whole whole election is a waste of time.

Dismissing a case because there MIGHT not be enough fraud to change the election is plain and simple turning a blind eye to crimes. I see this shit as the ignoring the broken window theory that allows crimes to escalate.

[RoadKing]

Comments have been made about if there is enough fraud to sway the election. People putting this kind of shit about ignoring the crime out should be in jail themselves as accomplices.

What the hell folks, ALL election/voter fraud, no matter how small needs to be investigated and proscuted. If it is't then the whole whole election is a waste of time.

Dismissing a case because there MIGHT not be enough fraud to change the election is plain and simple turning a blind eye to crimes. I see this shit as the ignoring the broken window theory that allows crimes to escalate.

Thoughtfully and well stated. I can take nothing away from that. I’ll respectfully leave it alone and not needlessly add to it…

Other than to say Giuliani would smile.

[hillsy v2]

Comments have been made about if there is enough fraud to sway the election. People putting this kind of shit about ignoring the crime out should be in jail themselves as accomplices.

Did you mean put people in jail for saying things you don't want to hear?

Sorry dude but there is an element of fraud in EVERY election and it can't ALL be investigated. You'd never get a result in another election for about a year if that were to happen. That's why they look at the numbers.

Again - sorry to anyone who doesn't like the results of this case. But it proves you have a legal system and a path to recourse. Just bring proof next time.

[DevilsFan]

I’m not missing your point. I find it invalid. Why? Here is why…

Our Republic cannot survive in a corrupt lawless condition. That’s a fact. “A Republic if you can keep it”. Like it or not, believe it or nay, our Republic was founded with the knowledge that it is based upon moral and spiritual values, values that are not “subjective”, the loss of these values spells doom. The loss of these values is why our country is declining.

Militias? Bullshit. Going to DC? Bullshit. That option is no longer viable. Think Jan 6, 2001. No one needs that shit any more. Militias? Bullshit. Rather, think of the people in the vast area of rural America and they are going nowhere, especially not to DC. When the fabric finally snaps, the cities, including DC, will see terrible civil violence and flames and rural America will stay home, in their communities with family and abundance of locally produced food stuff. If you think the majority of Americans are only interested in their gadgets, you are thinking like a typical city boy.

I believe my points are intermixed with yours. Yes, you are 100% correct in that, the loss of these values that our nation was founded on will spell destruction for us all. But the Republic "has" survived in a corrupt condition for decades. At what point does the lawless cross the line into the end of this nation? Is the political corruptness just an aspect that can maintain the ruled classes? Or does the ruling classes just submit to "business as usual".

Obviously, there has to be some major events (food shortage or bans, police states, mass murders by the states, etc) that would cause total chaos. Although it may begin where the people hole up in their cities and towns, how long would that last until the political wing eventually covers over these cities and towns (because you know they will)?

I see right now that the MAJORITY would take it. This is no longer anything CLOSE to the "Greatest Generation", where the men knew their duty was to sacrifice for the greater good. Today, the MAJORITY have been "trained" to wait for the handouts, brainwashed into thinking a government is designed to PROVIDE for their every need. They're sheep...and they don't even know it!
If you don't believe that then just start with the taxes that we pay and for what most of that money is used for.

[Tbeck]

Designer, you missed the point. Yes a sworn affidavit is a legal statement of a person's eye witness account, but they're pretty useless in the absence of hard evidence or when countered by a witness on the stand who can be cross examined. Additionally the validity of eye witness testimony has been proven to be inaccurate at best. Ask any cop.

In this case the plaintiffs failed to provide enough evidence of intent, wrongdoing, and/or deliberate action to disenfranchise voter's.

Much was made of the printing size which the defense overcame with evidence. The chain of custody and disenfranchised voter's were the two fact's that SHOULD have been an easy dunk for the Lake team, but they brought nothing to prove either had any impact, nothing.
So at the end of the testimony all you have is the Lake team claiming, but nothing solid to stand on. This further nullifies the affidavits.
DF, The judge allowed for the trial based on the disenfranchisement of voter's and chain of custody. Lake's team should have brought evidence supporting their position and they didn't. You can't blame the judge for ruling based on the evidence and that is what he did. That is as objective as one can be. For lake's team to have been successful they needed to bring in voter's who couldn't vote due to the printer issues, and evidence that ballots were injected during the break in chain of custody. They did neither.

[Designer]

Designer, you missed the point. Yes a sworn affidavit is a legal statement of a person's eye witness account, but they're pretty useless in the absence of hard evidence or when countered by a witness on the stand who can be cross examined. Additionally the validity of eye witness testimony has been proven to be inaccurate at best. Ask any cop.

Cute,...nice little Deflection there...using the same line as you did with RoadKing's message,...but,...No Sale,....for everyone sees,....it is YOU that Missed The Point.

You said this;

This is the problem with these election case's,...... you must have evidence, and that doesn't mean sworn affidavits. Those are just hearsay ....

See Your Words there is RED?....the word......."JUST HEARSAY" ?

Then what was posted that points out your how wrong you are?;

WRONG. Those affidavits about the election cases are Not all,...."just hearsay". Most all the Sworn Affidavits about the Election FRAUD since the 2020 election were persons giving Eyewitness Testimony Of Actions/Events They Saw First Hand,.....not hearsay of what they heard from another person/source.

And,...what was posted that SCHOOLS YOU about your WRONGNESS?;
And,..Affidavits Are Evidence; Here,.... let ME... Educate YOU.

The main purpose of an affidavit is to provide evidence in a court of law. It acts as an assurance or guarantees that it was written under oath, hence the name ‘affidavit‘.

Can affidavit be used as evidence?
Affidavits are used in courts all the time. When a witness swears to tell the truth about what he saw before he testifies, he’s swearing out an affidavit. An affidavit can also be used as evidence in court ......if the person swearing out the affidavit cannot be present to testify. Depositions are similar to affidavits — they are statements made under oath — but depositions are made outside of court and affidavits are written statements sworn to in front of a notary public.

Affidavits are legal documents and may be submitted as evidence in a court case.



It is your cavalier attitude of dismissing EVIDENCE by calling it Hearsay that is fundamental to perpetuating the Election STEALING we see going on.
Such LACKING in taking serious the evidence(s) of the biased destruction of the election process that is going on reveals more about you.


So,...cut the Evasional Crap Timmy. You Aren't-Not-Gunna BULL-SHIT US.

[HARRIS]

SHE WAS COOKED! THE DEM'S RIGGED IT AND THEY DON'T CARE, EXCEPT THAT IT WORKED AND THEY WON

WELL PLANNED AND EXECUTED. PERIOD!