This will go to the USSC

[Paleman]

Going to PA Supreme Court so you can relax.

Knowing that the PA supreme court is heavily liberal is not relaxing.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I never come unglued, and this case does not claim that the PASC violated the state Constitution, this case claims the law passed in 2019 violated the state Constitution. And now the PASC will decide if that is correct or not. And whatever they rule, that will be the end of it as there is nothing for the SCOTUS to rule on


I never said any such thing, this just your way of diverting from the fact you are ignorant on this topic.

I should put this in my sig.

No doubt you'll edit your post soon.

The JAW dropping stupidity of Trolling Traitor: {It is not possible for the PASC to violate the PA state Constitution}

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I should put this in my sig.

No doubt you'll edit your post soon.

The JAW dropping stupidity of Trolling Traitor: {It is not possible for the PASC to violate the PA state Constitution}

Please do.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Other OECD countries don't do it so why should we, especially in view of the fact that so many people have doubts/concerns about election integrity.

 

[j-mac]

View attachment 594789

So, we should do what Europe does? Is that the message here?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So, we should do what Europe does? Is that the message here?

I replied to this comment, showing that it was not accurate....Other OECD countries don't do it so why should we

That is all. Why did you not go after your fellow party member for bringing them up to start with?

 

[Dragonlady]

Not a single court challenge in the 2020 election ever went before a Judge but not because of the evidence. They were all tossed out for filing issues.

No court has heard a formal list of charges on the irregularities of the 2020 election.

But you'd never know that from our esteemed media.

There is no "formal list of charges" because there aren't sufficient numbers of irregularities to be bothered with. The over 200 cases of "voter fraud" involve individual voters, not some massive scheme to "steal the election".

All of this has been litigated. More than 70 times and there was no evidence of any irregularities at all. Fake affidavits, and phony allegations aren't "evidence".

 

[j-mac]

I replied to this comment, showing that it was not accurate....Other OECD countries don't do it so why should we

That is all. Why did you not go after your fellow party member for bringing them up to start with?

Would you say that the mail ballots being used as a result of last minute changes in key states, by entities bypassing their legislatures in violation of their constitutional process, was acceptable?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Would you say that the mail ballots being used as a result of last minute changes in key states, by entities bypassing their legislatures in violation of their constitutional process, was acceptable?

It did not only happen in "key states" a great many states made changes due to COVID, but it was only the key states you all cared about, and by "key" it is meant the ones Trump did not win. NC did basically what PA did, but you all only care about PA and not NC. If you all cared about more than just the states lost by Trump you might have a bit more credibility.

We have a system in place to determine if the changes were legal or not, this case being an example of those.

 

[j-mac]

It did not only happen in "key states" a great many states made changes due to COVID, but it was only the key states you all cared about, and by "key" it is meant the ones Trump did not win. NC did basically what PA did, but you all only care about PA and not NC. If you all cared about more than just the states lost by Trump you might have a bit more credibility.

We have a system in place to determine if the changes were legal or not, this case being an example of those.

Side stepping the question. I didn’t specifically name any states, that was your assumption. Care to answer the question now?

 

[task0778]

View attachment 594789

How many of those countries allow NO EXCUSE mail-in ballots? I'm thinking NONE. Does anyone know of any country where a voter can vote by mail without reason or ID?


Added:

According to the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), nearly every country in Europe has imposed either a partial or total ban on mail-in voting. One-fifth of the developed countries in the world don’t even allow absentee voting. If their citizens want to vote in national elections, they have to show up in their home country and vote in person (with voter ID). In the handful of developed nations that do allow mail-in voting, the voter is still required to show up in person and display their passport or another photo ID to pick up the ballot.

In Japan and Poland, you have to have a special certificate from a doctor proving that you’re disabled in order to receive a mail-in ballot. Brazil, Russia, Israel, Mexico and a host of additional developed nations have banned mail-in voting completely, and most require in-person voter ID. What does it say when a country like Mexico has more secure elections than Oregon or Rhode Island? Mexico banned all mail-in voting back in 1991, due to rampant vote fraud.

A few countries have decided to allow mail-in voting for this year only, due to the coronavirus. But in every one of those countries, the elected government has passed a provisional rule that sunsets after this year. The ban on mail-in voting will be immediately reinstated in those countries. Here in America, Democrats are demanding that mail-in voting be made the new permanent standard.

Study: Grown-up Countries Don’t Use Mail-In Voting for National Elections - American Liberty Report

As added proof that mail-in voting is perfectly safe and the smartest possible way to hold an election, the American Postal Worker’s Union has endorsed Joe Biden for president in 2020. The union, which represents the USPS employees in every town in America, issued a blistering, potty-mouthed...

www.americanlibertyemail.com

Do any of those few countries that do allow mail-in voting do so without cause? No reason? No ID? For future elections? I don't think so.

How many times have you seen some dork on cable news telling you there’s “no evidence” that main-in voting encourages fraud? Probably too many to count. But almost none of the developed countries in Europe trust mail-in voting. At all.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

GG is a Libertarian...nuff said.

No. GG is a mental midget.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No, that was the ruling from the SCTOUS, so it was their opinion which is the only one that really counts

Here's the problem, moron! You said that that SCOTUS could not rule on state constitutional issues. You were wrong.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You said that that SCOTUS could not rule on state constitutional issues. You were wrong.

That is not what I said at all, I said the SCOTUS could not tell a State SC they were wrong in the interpretation of their own constitution. Your examples do nothing to disprove that statement from me. SCTOUS can tells a state SC their constitution violates the US constitution, but that is all.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That is not what I said at all, I said the SCOTUS could not tell a State SC they were wrong in the interpretation of their own constitution. Your examples do nothing to disprove that statement from me. SCTOUS can tells a state SC their constitution violates the US constitution, but that is all.

No, that's not at all what you said.

I get that you're embarrassed by your own stupidity and dishonesty - you've no doubt changed your post by now, but I DID preserve it.

{It is not possible for the PASC to violate the PA state Constitution anymore than SCTOUS could violate the US Constitution.}



Stupid is as Trolling Traitor does...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, that's not at all what you said.

Yes, it is what I said.

{It is not possible for the PASC to violate the PA state Constitution anymore than SCTOUS could violate the US Constitution.}

That was a different post, and it is legally correct.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes, it is what I said.



That was a different post, and it is legally correct.

It's legally retarded.

No, justices are not infallible.

You're thinking of the pope... I get it, you Nazis worship the state as your god.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It's legally retarded.

No, justices are not infallible.

You're thinking of the pope... I get it, you Nazis worship the state as your god.

I never said they were infallible, you are just lying because you have nothing left.

Tell me, who would rule legally that the SCTOUS violated the US Constitution?

Oh, and the Pope is not infallible of rules would have not changed for the Catholic church since the days of Peter

 

[Uncensored2008]

I never said they were infallible, \

{It is not possible for the PASC to violate the PA state Constitution anymore than SCTOUS could violate the US Constitution.}

You wouldn't lie to me, would you?

A psychopath Nazi like you?

you are just lying because you have nothing left.

I'm "lying" by posting your words?

Tell me, who would rule legally that the SCTOUS violated the US Constitution?

Tell me, why are you ghouls so fearful of the RvW law being overturned?

Who do you fear will overturn the infallible prognostications of the Warren court?

Oh, and the Pope is not infallible of rules would have not changed for the Catholic church since the days of Peter

You think that the 9 unelected judges on the SCOTUS are the law - that the Constitution and case law are irrelevant, only our divine rulers matter.

Seig Heil.

 

[Augustine_]

Vote in person or by absentee ballot, period.

Lol "vote in person or vote by mail, period"