In a stunning reversal, Wayne County, MI Republican canvassers rescind certification votes

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Trump lost

Please provide a link to the certification of Joe Biden for all electoral votes.

Waiting

Please provide a link proving we all actually exist

Waiting

it's ok. i'm still waiting for the official link that says biden has won.

I’m still waiting for the official link exist

So you were wrong.

Got it.

I’m not wrong. Trump lost. Boo-hoo Hoo for you

 

[WelfareQueen]

He read a specific affidavit from a poll worker in Michigan. She worked decades for Wayne County

Sorry, couldn’t spend the hour listening to the whole thing yet. What I did listen to was rehashed stuff. Do you happen to have a name?

Yes, He gave her name to the press with her permission. The affidavit has been filed with the Court and is accessible to the Press and the Public. That is direct evidence of fraud. Biden's lawyers will have the opportunity to cross exam the witness or should have that opportunity. If there are truly hundreds of similar affidavits this could take some time.

Those people have every right to tell their story in a Court of Law. Biden and his people have every right to cross exam them.

You don’t happen to be able to tell me her name, could you?

Look at the video. About 30 minutes in.

It was Jessy Jacobs that you're referring to, and based on your description, I kind of assumed it was her.

Thing is, her affidavit was already submitted as part of the case of Constantino v Detroit. Her testimony was not sufficient to provide evidence of fraud. It was general, lacks specific times, dates and names. Furthermore, some of her complaints included concerns that were either irrelevant or demonstrated lack of understanding of the vote counting process. The judge's rationale is page 3-4 of the opinion.

https://www.greatlakesjc.org/wp-content/uploads/Opinion-and-Order-Judge-Kenny-Costantino.pdf

None of it is direct evidence of fraud because at worst it is circumstantial.

I said before that this was pretty much rehashed issues that have been heard and dismissed before and it looks like I'm right again.

Thank you for the link. I read the entire decision by the judge and also followed up and read a number of newspaper articles on his decision.

My interpretation: The judge seems to be acting as a defense lawyer for Joe Biden. He cites Detroit Democrat election officials as the final word on what happened. The Judge cites zero evidence to dispute the sworn affidavits submitted by the Trump campaign. Basically it's the Democrat election officials word versus the sworn testimony in the affidavits. Neither side can prove their case as judge did not allow a trial and cross examination.

The Judge did not dismiss the case and did not disallow the Trump campaign from seeking further legal remedies. He simply said he would not order an immediate injunction and punted the case to the election board. That's where we are now.

I can understand why the judge punted. He doesn't want to be the sole reason why the Michigan vote is not certified. He said as much. Basically, both sides are in limbo and nothing is proven because the Court will not allow the case to be heard. My final opinion. Inconclusive.

 

[iceberg]

Trump lost

Please provide a link to the certification of Joe Biden for all electoral votes.

Waiting

Please provide a link proving we all actually exist

Waiting

it's ok. i'm still waiting for the official link that says biden has won.

I’m still waiting for the official link exist

So you were wrong.

Got it.

I’m not wrong. Trump lost. Boo-hoo Hoo for you

I'm not crying about it. Just noting it's not decided yet.

Why do you have to assign emotions to me? Can't just talk like an adult?

 

[bripat9643]

Trump lost

Please provide a link to the certification of Joe Biden for all electoral votes.

Waiting

Please provide a link proving we all actually exist

Waiting

it's ok. i'm still waiting for the official link that says biden has won.

I’m still waiting for the official link exist

So you were wrong.

Got it.

I’m not wrong. Trump lost. Boo-hoo Hoo for you

You are wrong. Only a moron would goat about Trump losing.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

He read a specific affidavit from a poll worker in Michigan. She worked decades for Wayne County

Sorry, couldn’t spend the hour listening to the whole thing yet. What I did listen to was rehashed stuff. Do you happen to have a name?

Yes, He gave her name to the press with her permission. The affidavit has been filed with the Court and is accessible to the Press and the Public. That is direct evidence of fraud. Biden's lawyers will have the opportunity to cross exam the witness or should have that opportunity. If there are truly hundreds of similar affidavits this could take some time.

Those people have every right to tell their story in a Court of Law. Biden and his people have every right to cross exam them.

You don’t happen to be able to tell me her name, could you?

Look at the video. About 30 minutes in.

It was Jessy Jacobs that you're referring to, and based on your description, I kind of assumed it was her.

Thing is, her affidavit was already submitted as part of the case of Constantino v Detroit. Her testimony was not sufficient to provide evidence of fraud. It was general, lacks specific times, dates and names. Furthermore, some of her complaints included concerns that were either irrelevant or demonstrated lack of understanding of the vote counting process. The judge's rationale is page 3-4 of the opinion.

https://www.greatlakesjc.org/wp-content/uploads/Opinion-and-Order-Judge-Kenny-Costantino.pdf

None of it is direct evidence of fraud because at worst it is circumstantial.

I said before that this was pretty much rehashed issues that have been heard and dismissed before and it looks like I'm right again.

Thank you for the link. I read the entire decision by the judge and also followed up and read a number of newspaper articles on his decision.

My interpretation: The judge seems to be acting as a defense lawyer for Joe Biden. He cites Detroit Democrat election officials as the final word on what happened. The Judge cites zero evidence to dispute the sworn affidavits submitted by the Trump campaign. Basically it's the Democrat election officials word versus the sworn testimony in the affidavits. Neither side can prove their case as judge did not allow a trial and cross examination.

The Judge did not dismiss the case and did not disallow the Trump campaign from seeking further legal remedies. He simply said he would not order an immediate injunction and punted the case to the election board. That's where we are now.

I can understand why the judge punted. He doesn't want to be the sole reason why the Michigan vote is not certified. He said as much. Basically, both sides are in limbo and nothing is proven because the Court will not allow the case to be heard. My final opinion. Inconclusive.

Burden of proof is on the Plaintiff..hence the questioning. One does not get to make just any old accusation..and require the defendant prove that it is wrong. The accusation must be specific, something that the courts can relieve...and rise to the level of belief required. This takes evidence that is provable..not vague affidavits.

Bottom line--Biden won. There is still no evidence--no proof of any fraud of note--just procedural error and human mistakes.

Oh..and politics..lots and lots of politics.

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

Dems need to understand...

You aren’t going to do shit

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

The deadline passed; votes are certified; the fact that they now want to rescind their votes means jack shit; changing your mind isn’t a legally binding act.

You lost, magas. You fucking lost. Move on.

 

[iceberg]

Trump lost

Please provide a link to the certification of Joe Biden for all electoral votes.

Waiting

Please provide a link proving we all actually exist

Waiting

it's ok. i'm still waiting for the official link that says biden has won.

I’m still waiting for the official link exist

So you were wrong.

Got it.

I’m not wrong. Trump lost. Boo-hoo Hoo for you

You are wrong. Only a moron would goat about Trump losing.

only moron goes about assigning emotions to people based on how THEY feel, not the person they are talking to.

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

Just like Trump got more votes then the lovable Messiah?

It’s ‘than’.

Yes, Trump got more votes than Obama. And Biden got more votes than Trump. It’s called ‘population growth’, and ‘high voter turnout’.

You can take down your fake mensa diploma now.

 

[JusticeHammer]

Talk about Nazis.

Death threats for questioning voter rolls that do not reconcile with the votes cast?

Liberals are the Nazis and the fascists. Well done libs.

We are talking about 400 votes. That is hardly eye popping.

You and Trump are the fascist pigs.

Demscum are the fascist commie scum, period. Retarded idiots all of you.

Trump and his supporters are the fascist pondscum in this country. Youj are the ones who are retarded garbage.

You idiots are too stupid to realize you are the problem with this country. Pond scum is too good to be you.

 

[bripat9643]

He read a specific affidavit from a poll worker in Michigan. She worked decades for Wayne County

Sorry, couldn’t spend the hour listening to the whole thing yet. What I did listen to was rehashed stuff. Do you happen to have a name?

Yes, He gave her name to the press with her permission. The affidavit has been filed with the Court and is accessible to the Press and the Public. That is direct evidence of fraud. Biden's lawyers will have the opportunity to cross exam the witness or should have that opportunity. If there are truly hundreds of similar affidavits this could take some time.

Those people have every right to tell their story in a Court of Law. Biden and his people have every right to cross exam them.

You don’t happen to be able to tell me her name, could you?

Look at the video. About 30 minutes in.

It was Jessy Jacobs that you're referring to, and based on your description, I kind of assumed it was her.

Thing is, her affidavit was already submitted as part of the case of Constantino v Detroit. Her testimony was not sufficient to provide evidence of fraud. It was general, lacks specific times, dates and names. Furthermore, some of her complaints included concerns that were either irrelevant or demonstrated lack of understanding of the vote counting process. The judge's rationale is page 3-4 of the opinion.

https://www.greatlakesjc.org/wp-content/uploads/Opinion-and-Order-Judge-Kenny-Costantino.pdf

None of it is direct evidence of fraud because at worst it is circumstantial.

I said before that this was pretty much rehashed issues that have been heard and dismissed before and it looks like I'm right again.

Thank you for the link. I read the entire decision by the judge and also followed up and read a number of newspaper articles on his decision.

My interpretation: The judge seems to be acting as a defense lawyer for Joe Biden. He cites Detroit Democrat election officials as the final word on what happened. The Judge cites zero evidence to dispute the sworn affidavits submitted by the Trump campaign. Basically it's the Democrat election officials word versus the sworn testimony in the affidavits. Neither side can prove their case as judge did not allow a trial and cross examination.

The Judge did not dismiss the case and did not disallow the Trump campaign from seeking further legal remedies. He simply said he would not order an immediate injunction and punted the case to the election board. That's where we are now.

I can understand why the judge punted. He doesn't want to be the sole reason why the Michigan vote is not certified. He said as much. Basically, both sides are in limbo and nothing is proven because the Court will not allow the case to be heard. My final opinion. Inconclusive.

Burden of proof is on the Plaintiff..hence the questioning. One does not get to make just any old accusation..and require the defendant prove that it is wrong. The accusation must be specific, something that the courts can relieve...and rise to the level of belief required. This takes evidence that is provable..not vague affidavits.

Bottom line--Biden won. There is still no evidence--no proof of any fraud of note--just procedural error and human mistakes.

Oh..and politics..lots and lots of politics.

Who says the afficavits are vague, dumbass? The ones I've heard are very specific and provable.

 

[bripat9643]

The deadline passed; votes are certified; the fact that they now want to rescind their votes means jack shit; changing your mind isn’t a legally binding act.

You lost, magas. You fucking lost. Move on.

Votes made under threat of force or violence are worthless, dirtbag.

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

The deadline passed; votes are certified; the fact that they now want to rescind their votes means jack shit; changing your mind isn’t a legally binding act.

You lost, magas. You fucking lost. Move on.

Votes made under threat of force or violence are worthless, dirtbag.

The results are verified. Good luck with that, sore loser.
Hug your Trump flag tight tonight.

 

[bripat9643]

The deadline passed; votes are certified; the fact that they now want to rescind their votes means jack shit; changing your mind isn’t a legally binding act.

You lost, magas. You fucking lost. Move on.

Votes made under threat of force or violence are worthless, dirtbag.

The results are verified. Good luck with that, sore loser.
Hug your Trump flag tight tonight.

Verified, my ass. How would a gang of obvious crooks verify anything?

 

[colfax_m]

Who says the afficavits are vague, dumbass? The ones I've heard are very specific and provable.

The judges. Your opinion doesn't matter.

 

[bripat9643]

Who says the afficavits are vague, dumbass? The ones I've heard are very specific and provable.

The judges. Your opinion doesn't matter.

When did they say that?

 

[colfax_m]

Who says the afficavits are vague, dumbass? The ones I've heard are very specific and provable.

The judges. Your opinion doesn't matter.

When did they say that?

In the ruling.

 

[colfax_m]

Thank you for the link. I read the entire decision by the judge and also followed up and read a number of newspaper articles on his decision.

My interpretation: The judge seems to be acting as a defense lawyer for Joe Biden. He cites Detroit Democrat election officials as the final word on what happened. The Judge cites zero evidence to dispute the sworn affidavits submitted by the Trump campaign. Basically it's the Democrat election officials word versus the sworn testimony in the affidavits. Neither side can prove their case as judge did not allow a trial and cross examination.

The Judge did not dismiss the case and did not disallow the Trump campaign from seeking further legal remedies. He simply said he would not order an immediate injunction and punted the case to the election board. That's where we are now.

I can understand why the judge punted. He doesn't want to be the sole reason why the Michigan vote is not certified. He said as much. Basically, both sides are in limbo and nothing is proven because the Court will not allow the case to be heard. My final opinion. Inconclusive.

The judge is not acting as a defense lawyer for Biden, especially given Biden isn't even involved in this. There's no reason to doubt the election officials who have given statements under oath. That's the problem with circumstantial evidence, the type of which Jacobs produced, because there are circumstances where the evidence is irrelevant. Such is the case with reporting that they were instructed not to examine signatures at the main center because they were already done at the district level. Now, it's up to the complainants to argue against this point but they do not do so. Yes, the judge did allow for cross examination. The case may not have been dismissed but the motion for injunction was dismissed. Given the time frame involved, these are basically identical. Without an injunction, the Trump campaign has little chance to achieve their desired outcome.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

He read a specific affidavit from a poll worker in Michigan. She worked decades for Wayne County

Sorry, couldn’t spend the hour listening to the whole thing yet. What I did listen to was rehashed stuff. Do you happen to have a name?

Yes, He gave her name to the press with her permission. The affidavit has been filed with the Court and is accessible to the Press and the Public. That is direct evidence of fraud. Biden's lawyers will have the opportunity to cross exam the witness or should have that opportunity. If there are truly hundreds of similar affidavits this could take some time.

Those people have every right to tell their story in a Court of Law. Biden and his people have every right to cross exam them.

You don’t happen to be able to tell me her name, could you?

Look at the video. About 30 minutes in.

It was Jessy Jacobs that you're referring to, and based on your description, I kind of assumed it was her.

Thing is, her affidavit was already submitted as part of the case of Constantino v Detroit. Her testimony was not sufficient to provide evidence of fraud. It was general, lacks specific times, dates and names. Furthermore, some of her complaints included concerns that were either irrelevant or demonstrated lack of understanding of the vote counting process. The judge's rationale is page 3-4 of the opinion.

https://www.greatlakesjc.org/wp-content/uploads/Opinion-and-Order-Judge-Kenny-Costantino.pdf

None of it is direct evidence of fraud because at worst it is circumstantial.

I said before that this was pretty much rehashed issues that have been heard and dismissed before and it looks like I'm right again.

Thank you for the link. I read the entire decision by the judge and also followed up and read a number of newspaper articles on his decision.

My interpretation: The judge seems to be acting as a defense lawyer for Joe Biden. He cites Detroit Democrat election officials as the final word on what happened. The Judge cites zero evidence to dispute the sworn affidavits submitted by the Trump campaign. Basically it's the Democrat election officials word versus the sworn testimony in the affidavits. Neither side can prove their case as judge did not allow a trial and cross examination.

The Judge did not dismiss the case and did not disallow the Trump campaign from seeking further legal remedies. He simply said he would not order an immediate injunction and punted the case to the election board. That's where we are now.

I can understand why the judge punted. He doesn't want to be the sole reason why the Michigan vote is not certified. He said as much. Basically, both sides are in limbo and nothing is proven because the Court will not allow the case to be heard. My final opinion. Inconclusive.

Burden of proof is on the Plaintiff..hence the questioning. One does not get to make just any old accusation..and require the defendant prove that it is wrong. The accusation must be specific, something that the courts can relieve...and rise to the level of belief required. This takes evidence that is provable..not vague affidavits.

Bottom line--Biden won. There is still no evidence--no proof of any fraud of note--just procedural error and human mistakes.

Oh..and politics..lots and lots of politics.

Who says the afficavits are vague, dumbass? The ones I've heard are very specific and provable.

..And yet..The judge tossed them out--perhaps he forgot to wear his Trump election fraud decoder ring?

 

[WelfareQueen]

Thank you for the link. I read the entire decision by the judge and also followed up and read a number of newspaper articles on his decision.

My interpretation: The judge seems to be acting as a defense lawyer for Joe Biden. He cites Detroit Democrat election officials as the final word on what happened. The Judge cites zero evidence to dispute the sworn affidavits submitted by the Trump campaign. Basically it's the Democrat election officials word versus the sworn testimony in the affidavits. Neither side can prove their case as judge did not allow a trial and cross examination.

The Judge did not dismiss the case and did not disallow the Trump campaign from seeking further legal remedies. He simply said he would not order an immediate injunction and punted the case to the election board. That's where we are now.

I can understand why the judge punted. He doesn't want to be the sole reason why the Michigan vote is not certified. He said as much. Basically, both sides are in limbo and nothing is proven because the Court will not allow the case to be heard. My final opinion. Inconclusive.

The judge is not acting as a defense lawyer for Biden, especially given Biden isn't even involved in this. There's no reason to doubt the election officials who have given statements under oath. That's the problem with circumstantial evidence, the type of which Jacobs produced, because there are circumstances where the evidence is irrelevant. Such is the case with reporting that they were instructed not to examine signatures at the main center because they were already done at the district level. Now, it's up to the complainants to argue against this point but they do not do so. Yes, the judge did allow for cross examination. The case may not have been dismissed but the motion for injunction was dismissed. Given the time frame involved, these are basically identical. Without an injunction, the Trump campaign has little chance to achieve their desired outcome.

You said there is no reason to disbelieve the election officials. Fine. There is equally no reason to disbelieve the folks sworn affidavits.

Hence, without a trial we are at an impasse. As I said, inconclusive.

Just so you are clear I am looking at this as objectively a possible. As the judge said in his ruling, the statements made in the sworn affidavits are very serious. They deserve to be adjudicated in open court. That has not happened.

You are inclined to look at the sworn affidavits skeptically. I understand that. I am inclined to view the statements of the Democrat election officials with equal skepticism. I hope we all eventually find out the truth.