# Georgia judge, Stacey Abrams' sister, rules against voter purge before Senate runoffs



## shockedcanadian (Dec 29, 2020)

Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.

Per the article:

*Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, said she found no reason to recuse herself from the case.









						Georgia judge, Stacey Abrams' sister, rules against voter purge before Senate runoffs
					

Two counties voted to remove a tranche of voters' names from their rosters after separate complaints alleged that publicly available voter registration data matched unverified change-of-address records by the U.S. Postal Service.




					www.foxnews.com
				



*
A Georgia judge who is the sister of Democratic politician Stacey Abrams refused to recuse herself from a crucial election case, instead ruling against the purge of 4,000 voters from state rolls before Senate runoffs. 



U.S. District Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner's ruling comes after two counties voted to remove a tranche of voters' names from their rosters after two separate complaints alleged that publicly available voter registration data matched unverified change-of-address records by the U.S. Postal Service.

The complaints in Muscogee and Ben Hill counties, however, failed to prove that the voters had actually given up Georgia residences, according to reports by Politico. 

Marc Elias, a Democratic Party attorney whose group Democracy Forward filed the lawsuit challenging the purges, called Gardner's decision a "blow to GOP voter suppression."


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...


Why should she recuse herself? Abrams isn’t an elected official.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Dec 29, 2020)

Fat pig runs in the family I guess. It’s stupid that purging these voter rolls should be the law.


----------



## TroglocratsRdumb (Dec 29, 2020)

The Democrats are against the Right to Vote.


----------



## Mac-7 (Dec 29, 2020)

Thats an accomplished family

how did they do it since according to the lib race hustlers racist whites are holding black people down?


----------



## shockedcanadian (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...



Her sister ran for Governor there, for the Dem Party.  She was appointed by Obama, who is still very active in politics.

Are we to pretend her and her sister don't speak anymore?


----------



## martybegan (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



Plus Stacy Abrams was credited with "getting out the Dem vote" during the general election, and is doing the same thing for this election.


----------



## busybee01 (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...



Also federal laws forbid the removal of voters from the rolls 90 days before the election.


----------



## Eric Arthur Blair (Dec 29, 2020)

One sister helps the other. Where is the Supreme Court? Oh, right...in the bag for the left and
Corrupt Joe Biden.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



So you are essentially saying because of the she should recuse herself from ruling on anything political?

No, not seeing a conflict here.  Using your logic every Trump judge should be recused.


----------



## Care4all (Dec 29, 2020)

Removing people from the voter rolls without the time for the voter to object and prove they are state citizens, is planned voter disenfranchisement and suppression.

The last time this was brought up in court by the Trump supporters, it was denied by the previous judge because many or most of the people with change of addresses on their list were military men and women and their spouses.... transferred out of state to another base.

The military use their home state as their base residency .....

It does need to be kept up to date, but a week out from an election is not enough time, to do it right.


----------



## Care4all (Dec 29, 2020)

martybegan said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


WOW!  How evil could one get, than to encourage citizens to utilize their Constitutional right to vote!   That's just HORRIBLE!  Criminal!


----------



## HaShev (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...


So she broke 2 laws then, and it's up to someone with brass round thingies to file charges on both grounds and have her removed from the bench and then file charges on Stacy if at any time she communicated about the voter case =obstruction of justice.


----------



## shockedcanadian (Dec 29, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



Regardless of the merits of the case, *her decision to NOT recuse herself is a sign that some don't view their duties and the optics of impartiality as important*.

How much yelling and screaming was there for Sessions to recuse himself and it had even more of an impact and seriousness than even this run-off?

For someone to not even care about the optics of a situation, for me, suggests a level of arrogance and disregard for what is right.  "Power at all costs", whether they want it or not.  They aren't hiding it.


----------



## Eric Arthur Blair (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance? Can voter suppression be any more blatant? Do it after.


Can vote suppression be any more blatant? Yes! It can. How about disenfranchising over 73 million voters
by stealing the presidential election? 

I don't hear you whining about that, however. Stay awake. 
Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania 
are stirring and they are angry. And Michigan has already had their Dominion vote changing machines
tested and found they are very very corrupt. 

Plus a 2018 law is about to become invoked by Donald Trump dealing with foreign interference in our elections.
Venezuela, Iran, Russia have all been identified. It will give Trump the power to make many important moves
like impounding ALL Dominion machines nationwide, for starters.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 29, 2020)

busybee01 said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...


I don't think that covers special elections such as run offs


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.


Why? It should have been done in October at the latest. Why wouldn’t states be required to purge their voter rolls every two years? None of this left wing bullshit meets the common sense test.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Dec 29, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


You have a constitutional right to vote once in the place you live and that right should be defended for you by requiring an ID.


----------



## protectionist (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...


MORE EVIDENCE of VOTER FRAUD.

Here's some of the comments in the link article.




Naval Lint • 5 hours ago
Gee...there's no nepotism here...riiiiiiiiight.....suuuuurrrre...hang BOTH at the same time so they know they're EQUAL!!!

Sean Rickmin • an hour ago • edited
SO,mad dame judgey,corruption is OK with you and other demonRATS in your area and you do agree with dead people and zombies voting.



Mort Leith • 2 hours ago
So in other words,,, this unethicalBIACH made a ruling that violated GA State LAW ! !
Take her Law License asap....



francine martin • an hour ago
A-P-P-E-A-L




Diana Todd  francine martin • 30 minutes ago
to the Supreme Court honey, fast as their legs will carry them!!


----------



## HappyJoy (Dec 29, 2020)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



You think?


----------



## protectionist (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Marc Elias, a Democratic Party attorney whose group Democracy Forward filed the lawsuit challenging the purges, called Gardner's decision a "blow to GOP voter suppression."


Perish the thought that we should engage in _"suppression"_ of ILLEGAL and FALSE "votes"

Elias is simply admitting his FRAUDISM.


----------



## bodecea (Dec 29, 2020)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Fat pig runs in the family I guess. It’s stupid that purging these voter rolls should be the law.


Ironic.....from the party of the fattest, orangest pig of all.


----------



## protectionist (Dec 29, 2020)

Looks like the Georgia senatorial election, is another one heading for the STEAL department.


----------



## bodecea (Dec 29, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


We've seen many Republican state they believe that very thing.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...


I was just thinking she looked a lot like Stacey Abrahms.

How can this country survive when vermin like that can become judges?


----------



## lantern2814 (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Of course being an uneducated partisan ass you see nothing wrong. Simple ethics dictates recusal in a case involving a family member. Any decision could easily be appealed and overturned by a higher court. It’s called common sense and doing the right thing. Something you and your leftist friends can’t comprehend.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

bodecea said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Encouraging people to vote illegally is evil.  Only Democrats don't have a problem with it.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

bodecea said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Fat pig runs in the family I guess. It’s stupid that purging these voter rolls should be the law.
> ...


Abrams weighs more than two Trumps.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.


Conversely, expanding voting methods just before an election without testing that clearly benefits 1 side; could fraud be any more obvious?


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.
> ...


Only Republicans have to obey election laws.

Could it be anymore obvious that this country is sliding towards dictatorship?  It's only be a matter of a few years until we are saluting el Kamila maduro.


----------



## skye (Dec 29, 2020)

Really???

*Georgia judge, Stacey Abrams' sister, rules against voter purge before Senate runoffs


 




*


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.
> ...


One topic at a time.  What are your thoughts on what is happening here?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


if they should not be there, remove them.

.... 
The counties seemed to have improperly relied on unverified change-of-address data to invalidate registrations, the judge, Leslie Abrams Gardner, said in her order filed late on Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia.
..... 
"seeme to have"? how do we not know? they did or they did not.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

lantern2814 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



Is her family member directly involved in this case?


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



Is it appropriate to do a voter roll purge a week before an election?


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Dec 29, 2020)

bodecea said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > Fat pig runs in the family I guess. It’s stupid that purging these voter rolls should be the law.
> ...


LoL, nice come back clown.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


is it appropriate to change voting rules just before an election? 

normally no. I would say not. but if one side can do whatever they feel so can the other.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



Two different things.  Let’s hash out the one before going into the what about isms.  Purging voter rolls, with insufficient time for voters to remedy it, is no less than an attempt to disenfranchise.  Typically, this is done  and should be done, either on an off year or well ahead of any election.  Would you agree or disagree?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


No they are not.

one side got to change all the rules just before an election. you are fine with that. changing how we vote and opening it way up cause you want it. no different. the "isms" are valid and no I won't put them away cause you never did last time. 

now the Rs want to do it and you are NOT fine with changing things around.

you can't keep doing thungs you dont allow the other side to do. sooner or later we jenga and all hell breaks loose.

we are there.


----------



## progressive hunter (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.


but they moved???
so why keep them on when they dont live there anymore??


----------



## CowboyTed (Dec 29, 2020)

lantern2814 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



Stacey Abrams is not involved in the case. She is not a witness and just a member of a party which has an interest in the case.

If your standard was consistent, you can have a judge who has a family member in either party...

*Truth is the Judge Abrams ruled on precedence... Again there is very little proven voter fraud and a lot of proven voter suppression... 

Why are the GOP afraid of the voting public?*


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



I am not going down that rabbit hole with you.  One thing at a time.  Is it ok to purge voter rolls a week before a very high stakes election?


----------



## BlueGin (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...


A corrupt democrat asshole? I’m soooo shocked.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


You can't pick and choose which rules are OK to change at a moments notice. I won't Micro slice shit up because you can't see the whole picture.

the left allowed wholesale rule changes. it opened the box for more. stop acting surprised others are doing their version of it.

if you allow it PERIOD all are going to do it.

the issue isn't CAN THIS RULE BE CHANGED we are beyond that.

the issue is people change rules at will these days. you can't argue about a single issue or you dont see the entire problem.

sets and subsets.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

progressive hunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.
> ...


Strawman.  No one is arguing voter rolls shouldn’t be kept up to date Or purged.  The issue is the timing.

You don’t know for sure if they moved or not, there is usually a process that allows for challenges and reinstatement in plenty of time for an election.


----------



## progressive hunter (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


theres never a better time than right before an election,, you do want to insure theres no possibility of wrong doing dont you???

its not like its going to take a lot of time or money,, all they have to do is hit delete,,, the list is already made,,


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I am not picking and choosing, you are throwing in broad general claims, *I’m trying to stick to the claim made in the op* of this thread.  *Can you?

Do you think it is ok to purge voter rolls a week before an election?*


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I have said many times NO. 

HOWEVER it's also not right to change voting rules. the left did it and made up rules to suit purpose. 

stop acting so surprised others will do it too. you allow your side to make shit up, you allow making shit up to be done. PERIOD.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

progressive hunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > progressive hunter said:
> ...



Purges often include a number of legitimate voters, who will, in this case lack the time to challenge it.  That is why it is usually done well before an election.  To use your words:  you do
want to insure theres no possibility of wrong doing dont you???


----------



## progressive hunter (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


the list is already made and confirmed,,

not doing it leave a wide open gate for duplicate voting,,, and in lite of that already being a problem its a must do,,


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



Good.  I am glad you agree it is wrong, though that was substantially weakened by your justification following.

The argument SHOULD be, but somehow never is, is this:  *is it ever ok to disEnfranchise voters, regardless of who they vote for?*


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

progressive hunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > progressive hunter said:
> ...


Ahhh...the duplicate voting.  How many duplicate votes occurred in the November Georgia election that necessitates this unusually timed purge?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


because I am seeing the big picture. you are not from my point of view. 

if you allow your side to do something traditionally wrong FOR WHATEVER REASON, the other side by nature will follow suit. 

the fact you can't understand what I am trying to say is pretty frustrating. 

your lack of understanding "weakens" your critique of my views. 

you should be saying last minute changes are wrong. not justifying yours and demonizing others. 

it's fun telling others what they should be saying. let's keep at it!


----------



## progressive hunter (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


your dodging,, the point is the list is already made and confirmed so theres no reason not to,,,


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Who gives a shit? trump was counting on "his judges". What did he mean by that?


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

martybegan said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


She sure is!


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

Eric Arthur Blair said:


> One sister helps the other. Where is the Supreme Court? Oh, right...in the bag for the left and
> Corrupt Joe Biden.


Yeah, what's the issue? What's your problem with it? Spell it out. Use your words. Show us how smart you are.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

Care4all said:


> Removing people from the voter rolls without the time for the voter to object and prove they are state citizens, is planned voter disenfranchisement and suppression.


This is how Kemp stole the election from Abrams.


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> 
> Per the article:
> 
> ...



Why would Georgia try to remove voters from the rolls after the federal election and before the run-offs?  There isn't adequate time for a proper notification to challenge such voter suppression.

Sounds like Georgia is once against trying the suppress the vote.

Nice try at trying to blame the judge for this bullshit.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> progressive hunter said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


before we open up how we vote, do you want to ensure we minimize the potential of wrongdoing? 

equal application of principles would be amazing.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Wait until Joseph Biden (God's choice) changes the law to make it easier to vote, with automatic registration when you turn 18, like Selective Service. Their heads will explode.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

HaShev said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...


Blah blah blah - keep crying bitch.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

shockedcanadian said:


> Regardless of the merits of the case, *her decision to NOT recuse herself is a sign that some don't view their duties and the optics of impartiality as important*.


"Trump judges"


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

Eric Arthur Blair said:


> like impounding ALL Dominion machines nationwide, for starters.


Oh, we already wiped them clean.


----------



## shockedcanadian (Dec 29, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...



I blame the judge for not recusing herself.  So would you if you cared about Equal Justice before the law, Access to Justice and transparent, fair Due Process.  As you are Canadian I expect nothing less of you than the opinion you just expressed.  The concept of conflict of interest flies right over your head.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

HappyJoy said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > busybee01 said:
> ...


Can't you read? He said "I can't think". I believe him.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

lantern2814 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


You're going to have a rough 12 years.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Then so is changing our election laws one month before an election.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.
> ...


Both sides played by the same rules. The only difference was you had an orange buffoon telling his cult followers NOT to mail in their ballots and NOT to trust drop boxes and only vote in person. Combine that with cultists getting their daily programming that Trump was going to win in a landslide and I'm sure there were plenty of cultists who blew it off.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Specifically what law, changed by whom, and who, if any were disenfranchised?


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

skye said:


> Really???
> 
> *Georgia judge, Stacey Abrams' sister, rules against voter purge before Senate runoffs
> 
> ...


What is your legal argument for purging these voters?


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


ROFL!

You can't be this stupid.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Really???
> ...


They aren't legal voters, nimrod.


----------



## Moonglow (Dec 29, 2020)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Yet that right mentioned in the Constitution doesn't say that it takes an ID to vote.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Fuck off.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


On the other hand, we had your side using the printing press to crank out hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes and then counting them without observers in the middle of the night.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

BlueGin said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...


Name the corruption.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > progressive hunter said:
> ...


From my personal perspective, and based upon statements by those overseeing the elections, and the results of court chal,Engels, we seem to have done so.  But it isn’t just minimizing potential of wrongdoing that is involved.  There is a counterweight on tbe other end of the plank that must be taken into account and balanced:  the voter’s rights.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...



You are seriously ignorant.  The rules on reclusal are NOT designed for just political figures or public figures or just Republicans..  Lemme help you out here.. 

28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu) 

(a)
Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(b)He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1)
Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
(2)
Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;
(3)
Where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy;
(4)
He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
*(5)He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i)
Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;
(ii)
Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii)*
*Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv)*
*Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.



-----------------------------------------------------*

Stacey Abrams is THE REASON those 4000 NON RESIDENTS voted the last time and is determined that they vote THIS TIME.. She's running the steal in Georgia and bragging about it.. No way her sister doesn't know this.. 

It's pitchfork time..  If I lived in Georgia -- I'd be spending the week protesting outside that courthouse..


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


All voters. 

Not just the ones you can squeeze in if you alter the process for one sides benefit. 

You use "all voters" to hide behind a lot while you push one sides "rights".


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


That is all you can come up with?  You throw in broad general claims (as compared with the specific in the op) and expect a discussion.  Ok, let’s dissect ONE claim.  Can you provide that?


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


We did nothing of the sort.  Mail-in voting opened the floodgates for election fraud.  Voters have a right not to have their vote canceled by fraud.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 29, 2020)

progressive hunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > progressive hunter said:
> ...



Worst time possible is right before an election.  There is a process of sending out notifications to the those being stricken and giving them a time frame within with to respond to keep their names on the rolls.  

Then a second - final notice is sent, with a proper response time, before the name is removed.  There simply isn't enough time between the general and the run-off to properly identify, notify, and send final notifications to the people being stricken.  

This process needs at least to begin at least 6 months before the election, not 6 weeks or less.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Did you want the voting process changed because it equally helped all voters or because it gave the left an advantage?


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> BlueGin said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Election fraud, for one thing.


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 29, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



Again, you have provide no evidence of election fraud.  Trump saying something doesn't make it so.

Voters also have a right not to be lied to by the President.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Trump: "My judges"
FlaCalTenn: *crickets*

You have a serious lack of credibility on this, and I'm sure many more issues as you try to argue for "decency" and "optics" and "traditions" and all that good stuff.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> A voter purge shortly before a run off election of national importance?  Can voter suppression be any more blatant?  Do it after.



This is not an option.  It's ignoring the CRIMES that 4000 voters committed in November by knowingly taking advantage of mail in ballots to vote in districts they no longer live in..  Maybe aren't even RESIDENTS of Georgia..  You CANNOT ignore this..  It's a run-off.. There's no 90 day window provided.. And all HELL is gonna rain down if this is not fixed.. 

One extra-judicial remedy is to pass a Georgia statehouse resolution that ENHANCES THE PENALTIES for BEING CAUGHT casting fraudulent ballots next week.. THAT would satisfy most folks if the charges actually GET FILED AND PROSECUTED. 

4000 fraud voters would need their own jail -- wouldn't they???


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I've posted thread after thread and post after post with evidence of election fraud, shit for brains.



Dragonlady said:


> Voters also have a right not to be lied to by the President.



You have no such right


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Stacey Abrams is THE REASON those 4000 NON RESIDENTS voted the last time and is determined that they vote THIS TIME.. She's running the steal in Georgia and bragging about it.. No way her sister doesn't know this..


So, voting is stealing - if you're a Democrat.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> 4000 fraud voters


Fake news.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Stacey Abrams is THE REASON those 4000 NON RESIDENTS voted the last time and is determined that they vote THIS TIME.. She's running the steal in Georgia and bragging about it.. No way her sister doesn't know this..
> ...


Yes, actually.  It's a present auction on future goods.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


All voters is all voters.  You are the one trying to make this partisan.

To what degree are you willing to disenfranchise voters to minimize the potential of wrong doing?

Seems to me the first step in this equation would be to first determine whether or not there is a problem so urgent that the only resolution is to take a highly unusual step and purge the rolls a week before an election.

One poster pointed out that this is necessary to prevent “duplicate votes”.  That is an easy problem to quantify.  Where there any duplicate votes in the Georgia November election?  That would be the place to start in determining whether purging the rolls is Truly needed at this time.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


We've already determined there is a problem. I have no problem with preventing 1000 legal voters from voting if it stops just one illegal voter.  All these fraudulent votes have disenfranchised millions of voters.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Then name me any source who felt this change helped all voters equally. 

Every one I've read says it strongly benefitted the left. 

"all voters rights" you hide behind again.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I hate to say, but no widespread election fraud was found to have occurred.  No hordes of dead people voted either (just 3 zombie fraudsters who voted for Trump).  And that is not my opinion, it is per the DoJ, tbe AG, multiple state officials (mostly Republican) who oversaw the elections, and multiple court cases.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


You have determined it?  I must have missed that part.  Ok, so how many duplicate votes were there in the Georgia election?


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Anything that increases opportunities for fraud benefits the left.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Absofuckingl,utely her sister IS the front person for finding ALL the votes.. And counting them all LEGAL OR ILLEGAL and makes no bones about it..  Get a clue. *It's public knowledge her harvesting operation SET UP THESE "out of state" voters to vote in the 1st place..  *

Georgia group founded by Stacey Abrams under investigation for seeking out-of-state, dead voters | Fox News

*Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has launched investigations into several groups, including one founded by former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, for seeking to “aggressively” register “ineligible, out-of-state, or deceased voters” before the state’s Jan. 5 Senate runoff elections. *

Raffensburger is the idiot who entered into the "consent decree" with Abrahms just prior to Nov 3rd that opened all those illegal loopholes.. Seems like he's finally decided to "get right' with the interests of voters in Georgia..


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

What's the bigger sin?

A guy who used to live in Atlanta but now lives in Macon casting his vote in Atlanta.

A guy legally registered to vote wrongfully purged from the rolls, denying him his right.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


Stacey Abrams has no role in the Democratic Party. Period. End of story.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


What change are you talking about?  Purging the rolls?

For the record, it makes no difference if it helps all equally, as long as *it hinders none and as long as all voters within that district get treated equally.*


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

CowboyTed said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Absolute BULLSHIT..  Abrams vote harvesting operation was BRAGGING about getting out of state voters access to mail ins.  See my last post above where Rassenburger is indicting the group for these practices..  Whoever you're getting your news enema from needs to be fired...


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


Too late for him.  His head will be on he chopping block in the next election.  I will contribute to his opponent.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Show me any expert who said it benefitted all equally. 

You pushed for it because it was an advantage. Saying "everyone can do it" isn't being honest about motive. 

Yet you wonder why motives come into question so often, but you expect others to share outrage when this same process works against you.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> What's the bigger sin?
> 
> A guy who used to live in Atlanta but now lives in Macon casting his vote in Atlanta.
> 
> A guy legally registered to vote wrongfully purged from the rolls, denying him his right.



Laws are laws.. If you didn't care to re-register when you moved -- maybe you shouldn't vote..  Especially because HERE we're talking about 4000 voters who are NO LONGER IN THE STATE. Or never WERE in the state of Georgia..  

Dont you remember all the snark about getting people to move to Georgia JUST FOR THIS ELECTION?  It had a grain of truth to the design of packing the ballots with ILLEGAL VOTES.. 

Dems don't seem to understand LEGAL and ILLEGAL..  It's some kind of congenital mental defect..


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


I am going to wait and see what actually comes out of all Raffensburger’s claims, given how he ran against Abrams.  According to your article, Stacy Abrams is involved with only one of the multiple groups he is investigating, and none them are the participants of the legal actions folks seem to think the judge should recuse herself from.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Sure Sure Sure -- Just ran for GOVERNOR OF GEORGIA as a Democrat...  And whatTF does that have to do with anything even if you were right?  --- which your not obviously..


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> I am going to wait and see what actually comes out of all Raffensburger’s claims, given how he ran against Abrams.



Raffensburger groveled at her feet when she sued the state with a list of ILLEGAL DEMANDS to screw with the Georgia Constitution and the assigned power of the GA StateHouse to be the SOLE gatekeeper of election law..  He caved and signed a "consent decree" to keep the activists from burning down the major cities in Georgia if they didn't get their way.. 

What do you mean -- when he "ran against her"??  That's nothing recent is it? 

And there IS NO TIME "to wait and see"...  I want to see all 4000 of those fraud voters PROSECUTED and SERVING TIME at the very least if this goes thru.. They're gonna have to build a new prison just to HOLD ALL THOSE PEOPLE and Abrahms.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Stacey Abrams is THE REASON those 4000 NON RESIDENTS voted the last time and is determined that they vote THIS TIME.. She's running the steal in Georgia and bragging about it.. No way her sister doesn't know this..
> ...



Once again.. When Dems scream that they are gonna "COUNT ALL THE VOTES" --- what this REALLY MEANS is they count whether they are dead, living in another state, under the proper age or ANY OTHER ILLEGAL method...  So yeah.. Until it becomes "count every LEGAL VOTE" --- you're criminals and stealing elections..  Simple.. Live with it...


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



There is no evidence that these 4000 non-residents voted last election.  Your making a lot of assumptions.  Like Stacey Abrams had anything to do with these 4000 names being on the voters list in the first place.  You assumed that because the issue is voting rights, Abrams is associated with the case.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Then if theres no evidence these 4000 voters voted in the last election then they can be removed safely.

You really need to think this shit thru.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Abrams vote harvesting operation was BRAGGING about getting out of state voters access to mail ins.


Like any citizen is welcome to do. My brother lives in Germany but still votes in the Nevada election each year.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



I am totally not getting what you are trying to say here.

Purging voter rolls is something that needs to be done periodically in order to keep them up to date.

When rolls are purged, there are always a number of legitimate voters purged along with those who are dead or have moved.

For that reason it is rarely done shortly before an election.

Now you ask who does it benefit?  Well that depends on what jurisdiction is purging their rolls.  You seem obsessed with whether one side or another benefits or loses.  How about taking the side of the voter?  It doesn’t matter which side it is, anyone who is a legitimate voter should not be disenfranchised or have undue obstacles to voting.  Wouldn’t you agree?

If something results in benefiting one partisan side over another, soly due to personal voter preferences, not from any side being prevented from acting, then what does it matter?  I think the example you are looking at is mail in voting.  Voting at the polls increases Republican turn out. Voting by mail  increases Democrat turn out.  Both have equal access to each option within a jurisdiction.  What is the problem with that?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


[/QUOTE]
The left didn't push for mail in voting because it helped all equally. It was political for 1 sides benefit.

If you want to change how we vote then let's blow it up and start all over, starting with voter I'd or you do not vote. We still good with making wholesale changes to our voting process? Disenfranchise? They can get an ID just as easily as I can...

Same reasoning but for a different reason. Different reasons for doing it don't change wrong to right simply because you like one reason over the other. 

Now the right is doing something by purging voters and suddenly changing the rules is wrong.

You allow last minute rule changes or you don't. You get selective then you damn well show your changes are ONLY  FOR partisan benefit.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


Because you posted that guideline for recusal, which mentions being related to Party officials.

Didn't you read it first?  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




And so what she ran for Governor. That doesn't lose her any rights.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


They have every right to vote in the elections they wish. It's not "use it or lose it" with Constitutional rights.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...


Fuck off.


----------



## Elton (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...










I heard something about this today and it is actually in the "canons of judicial ethics" if I remember correctly.  Pretty much she is required to recuse herself because she is ruling in a case involving her sisters group.  That's a pretty clear conflict, don't you think?


----------



## 2aguy (Dec 29, 2020)

B


Synthaholic said:


> What's the bigger sin?
> 
> A guy who used to live in Atlanta but now lives in Macon casting his vote in Atlanta.
> 
> A guy legally registered to vote wrongfully purged from the rolls, denying him his right.



Both are equally wrong.   They both deny a lawful vote or erase a lawful vote, you doofus.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 29, 2020)

Elton said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Trump: "my judges".


----------



## Elton (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> Elton said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...








The two are not the same though, are they.  Unless you believe that laws only apply to certain people but if you are rich and powerful they don't apply to you.  Kind of like all of these Democrat governors making everyone stay indoors while they enjoy the uncrowded restaurants.  Kind of elitist if you ask me.  Do you support that sort of behavior?


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

[


Elton said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



From the artical, neither Abrams nor the group she founded, Democracy Forward, are litigants in this case, so why would her sister recuse herself?


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



Of course there is --  that's why now Raffensburger is opening the investigations into the ballot harvesting groups.. Like the one that Abrahms runs.. Here is one way her org boosted the registration rolls between Nov and now.. By telling college students (non residents) to CHANGE their residence to Georgia TEMPORARILY and DO IT by Dec 7th...

Georgia Secretary of State announces investigations into voter registration groups (fox5atlanta.com)

*Operation New Voter Registration (ONVR) for GA Senate Runoff: 12/7 Deadline Instructions for Georgia Tech (Fulton County) Students 1.. Option 1: If You Have a Valid Georgia Driver’s License or Georgia ID Vote On-line: Visit Website Register to Vote or use this “shortened” link: bit.ly/3pEeua3 2.. Option 2: If You don’t have GA License or State ID: That’s OKAY !!! Residing in Georgia for at least the last 30 days is the requirement to be able to vote in the upcoming Jan. 5th Runoff Election. • You could have voted in another state for the recent Nov 3rd Presidential Election. • Your current residence can be another state. You are simply changing your state of residence now; and it can be switched back for future elections (your option). Step 1: Become Registered to Vote in Georgia Mail in “State of Georgia Application For Voter Registration” (see Attachment) to the Secretary of State, State of Georgia, PO Box 105325, Atlanta, GA 30348-9562. All you need: i.. Last four digits of your Social Security number – AND – ii.. Proof of residency- copy of: current photo ID (** Any University Photo ID located in GA accepted**), current utility bill, bank statement, government check, Paycheck, or other governmental document that shows your name and GEORGIA address. Include as many as you can easily provide. Application Form can be found using the same link in #1 above. Scroll down to “Fill Out & Submit Voter Registration Application”, then choose “Register by Mail” Step 2: Keep Checking GA Website to Determine When You’ve Been Approved Mvp.sos.ga.gov/MVP/mvp.do or we shortened: bit.ly/38JZrFy Step 3: Request Absentee Ballot (which can be sent anywhere) If you will not be back in Georgia for early or same day voting on Jan 5th simply request an Absentee Ballot be mailed to you anywhere in US.


"Let me be very clear again--voting in Georgia when you are not a resident of Georgia is a felony," said Raffensperger.  "And encouraging college kids to commit felonies with no regard for what it might mean for them is despicable."  *
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Amen.. They'll spend 1 to 3 years in the slammer and screw up their lives -- but what do the Dems care if they can steal another election..  It's just "collateral damage" to them...


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Abrams vote harvesting operation was BRAGGING about getting out of state voters access to mail ins.
> ...



Does he have a residence in Nevada?  In the Service?  then it's legal..  Sad I have to tell you the diff..


----------



## lantern2814 (Dec 29, 2020)

CowboyTed said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Sorry idiot. Your own statement, “she is a member of a party that has an interest in the case”.  Any REAL judge would recuse himself if there is ANY appearance of a conflict. Period. Not suppression when Dem officials ignore court orders to purge voter rolls. Why are you idiots afraid of rules and the law?


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



That's NOT the part that APPLIES here..  I bolded the family relations part of it.. Could you not figure out what the APPLICABLE law was by me biggy sizing it for you???


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 29, 2020)

Elton said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



Post #80 in this thread on recusals. Fed law.. Similar at all levels of judgeships..  The bolded "family" part..


----------



## lantern2814 (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> Eric Arthur Blair said:
> 
> 
> > like impounding ALL Dominion machines nationwide, for starters.
> ...


Then enjoy prison idiot. That’s destruction of evidence in an ongoing court case. You get dumber by the day.


----------



## lantern2814 (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> lantern2814 said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


No I’m not. But you will trying to defend your idiocy. Of course you’re brain dead already so there’s that.....


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> The left didn't push for mail in voting because it helped all equally. It was political for 1 sides benefit.



Of course.  That is no surprise.  And for the same reason the right tried to quash mail in voting and force in person voting, because it benefitted them.  That is the way politics is and always has been.



> If you want to change how we vote then let's blow it up and start all over, starting with voter I'd or you do not vote. We still good with making wholesale changes to our voting process? Disenfranchise? They can get an ID just as easily as I can...



Except we really have not made wholesale changes to our voting system.  A number of states already had no-excuse absentee ballot systems and mail in voting, some for years, others had been in the process of transitioning to it.  It was already a trend.  The pandemic pushed it faster.



> Same reasoning but for a different reason. Different reasons for doing it don't change wrong to right simply because you like one reason over the other.
> 
> Now the right is doing something by purging voters and suddenly changing the rules is wrong.



You really don’t see a difference here do you?  In purging the rolls shortly before an election, you are possibly disenfranchising voters.

In the previous example, what voters are disenfranchised?



> You allow last minute rule changes or you don't. You get selective then you damn well show your changes are ONLY  FOR partisan benefit.



It isn’t about last minute rule changes, but about what effect those changes might have on voter rights and election integrity and whether they are legal and constitutional.

There is a big difference, for example, between trying to change a rule about when you can start processing mail in ballots (ie, start earlier because of an anticipated surge) and trying to change a rule to stop counting ballots (postmarked appropriately) by a certain date.

IF it is all about “last minute” rule changes...why did the Pennsylvania Republicans allow those rules for the primaries and on through the general election?  That is not last minute.  That also meant that the Republicans were willing to disenfranchise millions of voters voted according to tbe rules they were given.


----------



## progressive hunter (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > The left didn't push for mail in voting because it helped all equally. It was political for 1 sides benefit.
> ...


as usual youre just a one horse pony,,,


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Elton said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


There is no family involvement.  Stacey Abrams is not part of tbe case, neither is the group she founded.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > The left didn't push for mail in voting because it helped all equally. It was political for 1 sides benefit.
> ...


You really don't see the difference here do you? 

By opening our system up to fraud you are stealing votes from those who do it legally. 

Again, you allow last minute changes, you allow, last minute changes. Crying foul the other side does it too? 

That's why we are in this bag of shit.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Oh I do see the difference, you are now adding another element to the argument that wasn’t in it before.  So let’s examine it.  Some fraud occurs whether you vote in mail or at the polls, yet rarely has there been any sort of wide scale fraud that would alter the results.  Most claims of fraud end up being inadvertent or human error.  Despite all the screaming by opponents of mail in voting, this election ended up being one of the most secure elections we’ve had.  No evidence of any wide spread fraud and that is per the DoJ (specifically directed to investigate claims of fraud) on down to tbe (mostly Republican) election officials and the courts.  

Who was disenfranchised?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I'm not adding an element.

You allow side a to change things, you allow side b to change also. Rules we all follow.

Bitching someone is making changes you don't agree with is at this point, to me, shutting the barn door after you let the cows out.

You fail to understand I see things as pieces that fit a whole. You see them all as unrelated singular events that should be judged all individually.

I see a set of rules for all to play by
You see each situation needing its own set of rules.

It makes that common ground a bitch to get to.


----------



## HaShev (Dec 29, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> HaShev said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


Interesting choice of words about the law rather then refute the issues.  Should we be shocked that the lawless ones would call the law it's "B" word?
-you've been lawyered!


----------



## Coyote (Dec 29, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



No. What makes common ground a bitch is *you have no idea what I see.  At all*.

Your total focus is partisan tit for tat.  

Rules change and rules need to change according to what is happening.  But there is a process (different for each state) and there is a process for challenging it (the courts).  A lot of what you are calling last minute rule changes were not exactly last minute (they went into effect for the primaries) and were made in attempt to have safe voting during a pandemic.

As long as the rule changes are done legally, maintain election integrity, and no one is disenfranchised as a result, I don’t have a problem with it.

I can only think of one case where the legality of who was allowed to make the change was challenged and that was PA.  That was also case where the Republicans allowed it to go unchallenged through the primaries and did not challenge it until after the general election.  The judge appropriately told them they had waited to long.  They would have disenfranchised thousands of voters who voted in good faith.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 30, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> HappyJoy said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


those who are incapable of thinking believe there wasn't a stolen election.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 30, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...


those days are dead you don't bring pitchforks to shootings


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


Why wouldn't it have helped both sides equally?

There is ZERO reason why the measure itself was not an equal opportunity for both right and left wing citizens to exercise their right to vote.

How was the measure not an equal opportunity for citizens on both sides of the aisle???


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > lantern2814 said:
> ...


but when was this group founded by Abrams and when was the last year she Chaired it??


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

A REMNDER from the open link...



U.S. District Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner's ruling comes after two counties voted to remove a tranche of voters' names from their rosters after two separate complaints alleged that publicly available voter registration data matched unverified change-of-address records by the U.S. Postal Service.

*The complaints in Muscogee and Ben Hill counties, however, failed to prove that the voters had actually given up Georgia residences, according to reports by Politico.*

Marc Elias, a Democratic Party attorney whose group Democracy Forward filed the lawsuit challenging the purges, called Gardner's decision a "blow to GOP voter suppression."

*Gardner's ruling said that booting thousands of voters from the rosters appeared to violate a federal law that requires a voter be given an opportunity to provide written confirmation of a change of address prior to being removed from the list. In addition, the necessary protocols for purging the roster were not followed within 90 days of a federal election*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 30, 2020)

Care4all said:


> A REMNDER from the open link...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


and that judge should have refused herself since her sister Stacy Abrams is in charge of collecting voter registration


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS (Dec 30, 2020)

busybee01 said:


> shockedcanadian said:
> 
> 
> > Remember the saying "unintended consequences".  This, of the Trump loss in particular Battleground States due to Bidens overwhelming popularity.
> ...



Election laws should be enforced now?


----------



## LAUGHatLEFTISTS (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Is it appropriate to change election laws months before an election ?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


And you only see things that benefit you, not the system itself.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


She thinks so, yes.


----------



## martybegan (Dec 30, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > shockedcanadian said:
> ...



So people who moved from an address should still be able to vote from that address, even if they moved to another State?


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


As for partisan shit, I want 1 set of rules that do not change as one side needs them too for their side. Don't care the rule or side, all must follow. 

I have NEVER seen you condem the actions of the left. Best I've seen is you finally said rioting may be wrong HOWEVER it's emotionally justified because of their reasons. 

I don't care the reasons. Follow law.


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

martybegan said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Marty, where did your common sense disappear to?

- Not all people who change their address temporarily with the post office, are giving up Their state residency....  I put in a change of address form when I go to stay with my parents a few months a year down in Florida, people change their mailing address when they are going g to be at their vacation homes, people change their address with the mail service when they are in the Military and transfer to another State or country, but always keep their home state, as their legal residence and citizenship with.....

What I SAID. WAS IT BROKE THE LAW, to remove people from the state's voter rolls, within 90 days of an election, giving them no opportunity to show they are still citizens.

These two counties, were BREAKING THE LAW by purging voters from the voter roll one or two weeks, before an election, and this is why the judge, justly ruled against them....
Her decision was BASED ON THE LAW, and NOT done on some imaginary partisan whim.


----------



## martybegan (Dec 30, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



WHAT LAW.

Judges in Penn "broke the law" when changing voting rules, but there you don't seem to have a problem with it.

I wonder why......


----------



## 22lcidw (Dec 30, 2020)

Synthaholic said:


> Elton said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


The real truth..."Prog Judges".


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

martybegan said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Fake news.  They didn't break the law.  It was already brought to court in one of the Trump lawsuits that he lost earlier...  the ruling was the changes DID NOT break the law....

READ THE OP LINK.

It tells YOU which laws were broken by the counties.


----------



## martybegan (Dec 30, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



How is a postal change of address form not a written acknowledgement of changing addresses?


----------



## my2¢ (Dec 30, 2020)

Good attention grabbing headline to the article by Fox News.  It raised suspicion within me of some sort of wrongfulness. Then upon reading the short article's contents, it left me with a totally opposite impression and that there was nothing here to see. 

Bait Click:1 My2¢: 0


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

martybegan said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


Changing an address with the post office is not necessarily changing one's State citizenship.....  duh.....

I've already explained WHY.... read my earlier post AGAIN.


----------



## martybegan (Dec 30, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



it changes things besides your State citizenship, ED's, council districts, etc. 

Yes, it doesn't matter in a Senate Election, but again we have Dems saying "eh" votes are OK because we think they will vote for us.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



*There we go again. And again.  And again.* And frankly *you lie*.  I have NEVER said rioting is ok.  EVER.  Protest yes.  Riot no.  I have NEVER justified it.  Just like you claimed my use of "Trumptard" was my go-to response when a quick check showed I used it exactly 3 times, on one day in June, in response to stuff like "Libtard" (which you seem to have no problem with).

"Never" ... "always"...for ONCE *why don't you take what I actually say* instead of claiming stuff I don't?

THIS is why we can't find common ground.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

22lcidw said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Elton said:
> ...



The real truth....they transform into "Prog Judges" as soon as they refuse to rule to Trump's bidding.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > A REMNDER from the open link...
> ...



Her sister isn't one of the litigants and voter registrations were collected by multiple groups.  The group her sister founded was not one of the ones in the court case.  She had no reason to recuse.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



IF you are going to change election laws or, in this case RULES (I don't think any laws were changed) then yes, MONTHS before IS appropriate.  Not days before.


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 30, 2020)

SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas has a VERY active activist wife whose activities have never caused Thomas to recuse himself.


----------



## Care4all (Dec 30, 2020)

martybegan said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > martybegan said:
> ...


It means that automatically....only in a demented person's head....Marty....


----------



## martybegan (Dec 30, 2020)

Care4all said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> > Care4all said:
> ...



It's reality. Dem's don't care about fraud because they think it helps them.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:
> ...


of course the way you wish it to be is appropriate. the way others wish it to be never seems to be.

have you ever looked at what "the left" does in instances like this and thought "that is bullshit" or is it justified because you agree with "the cause"?

all i am saying is - once you bypass common laws and working for both sides to achieve a singular goal, others will do the same and no - you won't always agree with what they choose to do it for.

but you validated the path by taking it for what you wanted, which puts you in a bad position to bitch about "them" doing the same but for their own reasons.

i don't care the reasons. i keep telling you that. i care we all follow the same set of rules. you keep saying that is partisan and near as i can tell, that is about as far from it as you can be.

the rule is - don't go fucking with the election laws before an election. not days, weeks or months. do it when there is no election to give yourself time to ensure it's fair to all sides.

now go ahead and call that idea / goal partisan. it's your next move.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


1. i don't lie. you just don't like what i say and as usual, go all extreme and run to the furthest extreme you can.
2. you have said rioting justified when you ignore someone for "so long" (real definite time period there to go by). you do the "yea it's wrong BUT HEY - YOU IGNORED THEM" crap.
3. "trump-tard" was never meant to be a YOU ALWAYS SAY TRUMPTARD. it's meant to say you "trump-wash" everything into it always coming back to TRUMP. you have chosen him to be your posterchild of evil i suppose so when someone does something you don't like, you seem to think they do it to defend trump; not simply tell you you're wrong.

and you bitching about FOR ONCE TAKE WHAT I SAY - woman, i tried to define this once before. remember "tell me what a successful "mexico paying for the wall" could consist of" so we could get a baseline. you refused and called me a troll. why? dunno except i was trying to pin you down to a specific answer because you tend to BOUNCE AROUND a lot as your emotions dictate.

THIS is why we cannot find common ground.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > LAUGHatLEFTISTS said:
> ...


Let me put it like this.

I don't believe it's OK to change election laws just ahead of an election. If you do it, do it as a side process for all to attend and provide input as a group decision or discussion.

Period.

You seem to think it's OK to change "some" laws.

OK fine. I disagree but if you do this, OTHERS will want to also and seldom in a manner you approve of.

To me you want to pick and choose ONLY laws that benefit your mindset while passing it off as "for all".

SO... I don't want either side changing shit ahead of an election HOWEVER if you allow it for your side, to me its now allowed for all.

This is why you hear "rules for me and not for thee" about the left so often.


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Elton said:
> ...



Abrams org is DIRECTLY involved in vote scamming.. Just the fact they are sisters is more than reason enough to SUSPECT the judge is corrupt for not recusing..  Abrams org WILL LIE and CHEAT and SCAM until some form of justice materializes...  That's what they VOWED to do..  And that's what they BRAGGED about having done.. 

The Karma will get you... If this is FUTURE of American politics and YOU IGNORE IT  -- you're helping to destroy America... NO crime will ever be punished, but we as a country will be...


----------



## flacaltenn (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Elton said:
> ...



I just posted on THIS PAGE an email blast from HER ORGANIZATION... It's asking "out of state" students at GA universities to temporary CHANGE THEIR REGISTRATION to vote in the UPCOMING RUN-OFF..  This is a State election. Out of state students have NO business voting in it.. It's NOT for THEIR senators.. 

This is EXACTLY WHAT THE CASE IN THE OPost was about,..  Removing NON-Georgians illegally registered..

Somehow you rationalize this as "no connection" to the case.. It takes an uber partisan warrior to come to that conclusion.. The judge IS CORRUPT, UNPROFESSIONAL and involved in the stealing of elections..


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


First off, if out of state students are residing there, have a residence there and pay state taxes, they should be able to vote there.  Students do that around the country.  It is not illegal.

Frankly, it is uberpartisan to insist the election was stolen in face face of reality.  The judge has no reason to recuse, neither her sister nor her sister's group are among the litigants.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


I think the karma is not as partisan as you think.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


I dont think any rules that affect voter participation or understanding,  should be changed close to an election.

But as I pointed out, you can have some rules that are mostly administrative, such as when mail in ballot processing can begin, that have no effect on the voting process and election integrity, so I see no reason not to make changes if election officials anticipate an unusually large volume.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Like I said, you wanna go changing the rules means everyone can. Justifying YOUR change is pointless

Again, I see you focus on individual battles and why your changes are good, others bad. .

I don't really care about people or how they play within the rules as long as they abide by them. When you start putting your changes, to the rules ahead of others REGUARDLESS OF THE REASON, others will do the same for their own reasons.

You keep acting as if I advocate one change over another.

I don't.

I simply realize you go making drastic changes others will too. Then we get to fight about who had the better reason for 4he changes.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


1. I gave two examples.
2. link to it.
3.Trump wash?  I am up front about not liking either Trump or his policies.  You seem to think I should say good about him when his policies (not to mention conduct) are the antithesis of what I support.  I am perfectly happy to argue policy aspects but you inevitably start up on how it is all just Trump hate or fall back on splitting hairs when I do.  Expecting me to like Trump would be like expecting to like Hilary, who, I might add, you seem to see as the personification of evil.


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I never said you had to like Trump.

And to think recently you bitched at me for telling you what you were saying.

Show me where I said that. I now, want to be as literal as "trumptard" or you are as you called me, a liar.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


and while i try to focus on the issue/topic, you come back at me, as usual.

later, Coyote  - enough is enough.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



I said “you seem to think”.



> Show me where I said that. I now, want to be as literal as "trumptard" or you are as you called me, a liar.


See above.  In the meantime, link to where I supported riots, because that is a pretty damn serious accusation.*  I will wait.*

In the meantime, back to the original discussion...changing rules.  I actually don’t agree with rules right before ( as in a week or two) Without a darn good reason. I see both sides trying to leverage their sides, do you?

I don’t really care that much as long as no voters are obstructed or disenfranchised from exercising their right on either side, and election integrity is preserved.  I have been consistent on voter rights period.  What I SEEM to see from you is a greater concern for whinch team might be getting an advantage than with voter rights.  In this case in Georgia, the judge cited clear election law in her ruling, which would be violated by purging the rolls at this particular time.

Since we’ve been talking generalities, what specific rule change did you feel was made to close to an election that justified, in your view, this Republican tit for tat, as you describe it?

Rather than


----------



## iceberg (Dec 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> iceberg said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


You don't understand what I am saying and you never will.


----------



## Coyote (Dec 30, 2020)

iceberg said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > iceberg said:
> ...



So much for attempting to discuss the issues


----------



## Synthaholic (Dec 30, 2020)

Suck it losers!


----------



## Monk-Eye (Dec 30, 2020)

*" Georgia State Law Directs Only Those Eligible To Vote In Initial Election Are Allowed To Vote In Runoff Election Denied By Activist Judges Over Stepping Federal Jurisdiction Against Us Tenth Amendment And Common Sense "

* Demon Rat Criminals **


Coyote said:


> IF you are going to change election laws or, in this case RULES (I don't think any laws were changed) then yes, MONTHS before IS appropriate.  Not days before.











						Is the Ga Constitution Being Violated with New Voter Registrations for January Runoff? - AllOnGeorgia
					

As Trump campaign attorney Lin Wood tweeted that the Georgia Secretary of State was ‘blatantly violating’ the Georgia Constitution - specifically a clause that prohibits voting in runoff elections if the voter was not registered ‘and eligible’ in the general election - many Georgians are asking...




					allongeorgia.com
				




_The Georgia Secretary of State’s Office reported last week that nearly *76,000 new voters registered* between the November 3, 2020 election and the voter registration deadline on December 7, 2020. _

_*In Georgia, our Constitution reads that “[a] run-off election shall be a continuation of the general election and only persons who were entitled to vote in the general election shall be entitled to vote therein; and only those votes cast for the persons designated for the runoff shall be counted in the tabulation and canvass of the votes cast.”*_

_A settlement from 2017 following a suit by the The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (representing the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP, the Georgia Coalition for the Peoples’ Agenda, ProGeorgia State Table, Third Sector Development, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Atlanta) against the state of Georgia is what led the state to stop enforcing Article II, Section II, Paragraph II of the Constitution as it pertains to federal elections. 

Previously, a ‘blackout period’ for voter registration was in place between an election and a runoff election. 

The lawsuit filed in April 2017 alleged that Georgia’s practice of cutting off voter registration for federal run-off elections two months earlier than guaranteed was a violation of federal law, particularly Section 8 of the *National Voter Registration Act of 1993* [52 USC 20507(a)(1)]. _

_*On October 13, 2017, a Consent Decree was signed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia after U.S. District Judge Timothy Batten (a Bush appointee) ruled that against the state. It dismissed ‘the State of Georgia’ from the suit and ordered the Secretary of State’s Office to stop enforcing the aforementioned section of the state Constitution and any similar state statute. In short, the Consent Decree stated that Georgia cannot prescribe a voter registration deadline in any federal election, *“including all future federal runoffs, that is longer than the deadline provided under state law and in no case longer than 30 days before an election.” _


** Democrats Explain How To Cheat In Elections By Casting Votes For Senators From Two States By Compromising Runoff Election Integrity *








						Lawsuit alleged out-of-staters coming to Georgia to vote; 2nd suit attacks voting process
					

A judge dismissed the voter registration lawsuit. A new lawsuit is pending about absentee ballots and voting machines.



					www.savannahnow.com
				



*Georgia Republicans, including the campaigns of U.S. Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, sued on Thursday to get election officials to remove from the ballot count the ballots of new Georgia residents who vote in the ongoing runoff elections for Georgia’s two U.S. Senate seats.

*A federal judge on Friday evening rejected their case.*

Loeffler and Perdue are defending their seats from Democratic challengers Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff. Polling says the races are close. If the Democrats win, they will snatch control of the U.S. Senate away from the Republicans as Democrat Joe Biden becomes president.

In the voter residency lawsuit filed Thursday, the plaintiffs believe some new Georgia residents “raced to Georgia to register to vote” specifically to cast ballots in Georgia’s elections for the U.S. Senate, lawyer George Meros of Tallahassee, Florida, said in a hearing late Friday afternoon. *Voters shouldn’t be allowed to vote in the same election cycle for senators in two states, Meros told the judge.*

He contended that it is illegal under the federal Voting Rights Act and unfair to Georgia’s other voters.

The lawsuit cites statements made in November on Twitter and on CNN in which commentators said people should quickly move to Georgia in order to vote in the runoff.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, whose office is in charge of elections, previously said his office is investigating whether several groups were bringing people to Georgia to fraudulently vote.

Voter registration reopened following the Nov. 3 general election and closed on Dec. 7 for the runoff balloting. Residents who weren’t registered to vote in Georgia the Nov. 3 balloting (when no U.S. Senate candidates obtained a majority) were allowed to register to vote in the runoff elections. Early voting and absentee voting are underway, and balloting ends Jan. 5.

** Bantering An Alternate Election Faux Pas Invalidating Election And No Electoral College Votes Should Be Allowed **





__





						Voter identification laws by state
					

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics




					ballotpedia.org
				



*Pennsylvania *does not require voters to present identification while voting in most cases. *However, first-time voters must show identification. Accepted forms include both photo and non-photo ID. *






__





						Secretaries Of State Malfeasance Causing Elections Not To Be Validated And Electoral Votes Are Not Included In Those For President
					

" Secretaries Of State Malfeasance Causing Elections Not To Be Validated And Electoral Votes Are Not Included In Those For President "  * Proclivities Of Whomping Non Citizen Usurpers And Correcting Despotic Officials Harming Citizens Of The State *  It is direct that states unable to validate...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## Coyote (Dec 31, 2020)

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Georgia State Law Directs Only Those Eligible To Vote In Initial Election Are Allowed To Vote In Runoff Election Denied By Activist Judges Over Stepping Federal Jurisdiction Against Us Tenth Amendment And Common Sense "
> 
> * Demon Rat Criminals **
> 
> ...




So...in all that, I'm not clear on something.

Is the issue of "4000" votes - 4000 people who voted in the initial election?  Or is it 4000 new people who registered after the initial election?


----------



## Monk-Eye (Jan 1, 2021)

*" Will Supposedly Be Denied To Vote So Why Not Purge "

* Demon Rats Working To Sneak Illegitimate Votes **


Coyote said:


> So...in all that, I'm not clear on something.
> Is the issue of "4000" votes - 4000 people who voted in the initial election?  Or is it 4000 new people who registered after the initial election?


Allowing 76,000 voters to register from other states for a runoff election is criminal .

Otherwise , in address of this op , imho the judge appears to be a disingenuous imbecile , in that according to georgia secretary of state public notice the idiot is too stupid to understand georgia voting laws , in that nothing will prevent the state from not sending an absentee ballot , in that nothing will keep the state from not accepting the +4000 voters should they proceed to the poles , if they have not followed the correct method for reinstating their qualifications to vote .

]Obama Appointed Judge Strikes Blow To Rule Of Law In Georgia Elections | Elections
_On December 28, 2020, Judge Abrams Gardner enjoined the Muscogee and Ben Hill Boards of Elections from proceeding with challenges to 4,033 and 152 registered voters respectively who have also filed a National Change of Address notice with the United States Postal Service, indicating they had moved. *Last week, the Secretary Raffensperger sent letters to 8,000 such individuals warning them of the consequences of voting while not a resident of Georgia.*_

_*By Georgia law, O.C.G.A. § 21-2-217, “If a person removes to another state with the intention of making it such person's residence, such person shall be considered to have lost such person's residence in this state.”

At no point in the ruling does Judge Abrams Gardner acknowledge the voter challenge procedures allowed by Georgia law (O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230). Georgia law outlines a specific process by which Georgians can challenge the qualifications of other registered Georgia voters up until 5:00pm on the day before Election Day if the voter casts an absentee ballot. Any “such challenge shall be in writing and specify distinctly the grounds of such challenge.” *__At that point, each challenged voter is entitled to a hearing at which “[t]he burden shall be on the elector making the challenge to prove that the person being challenged is not qualified” (O.C.G.A. § 21-2-229)._

_Additionally, throughout her order, *Judge Abrams Gardner repeatedly refers to removing individuals from the voter lists. The provisions of Georgia law utilized by the Muscogee and Ben Hill Boards of Elections, O.C.G.A. § 21-2-230, deal specifically to the acceptance or rejection of ballots cast by a challenged individual, not to the removal of individuals from voter lists.*_


----------

