Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
You quote from the Democrat sponsors? the nyt?
Are you serious?
I do not trust a damn word said from that rag, the same disgusting rag that posted sensitive pictures of the dead from Manchester Arena bombing. **** newspaper. But that’s the Democrats all over, cheating *******s.
|
Here is the same case reporting by the Associated Press:
https://apnews.com/article/election-...43ebe66a29f7e8
You cannot go to court and assert something to be true without evidence. As the Judge in the same case says:
Quote:
The federal judge who has the case, John Jones, has said he was doubtful of the claims. He said the Public Interest Legal Foundation that brought the claims was asking the court to accept that there were dead people on voter rolls, and he asked for proof and questioned why they had waited until the “eleventh hour” to file suit.
“We cannot and will not take plaintiff’s word for it —in an election where every vote matters, we will not disenfranchise potentially eligible voters based solely upon the allegations of a private foundation,” he wrote in an Oct. 20 ruling.
|
---------- Post added at 20:42 ---------- Previous post was at 20:40 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
Nope, what a stupid question.
All this bollocks that Trump should concede, rubbish. If there are voting irregularities, that needs sorting by the courts, then so be it. Democrats have form for cheating. They are not to be trusted.
|
Yes, exactly. By the courts.
Will you accept the election as legitimate if the courts find there isn't evidence of widespread voter fraud? That's the way these allegations should be handled. Get the evidence, go to court. I fully agree with that. No one (I hope) is against investigating fraud if it's there but it shouldn't be done via Trump's twitter feed or Twitter posts in general.