>> If you're so keen on that being the reason for the "steal," I'd think you'd be on top of all those cases.
Believe it or not, I actually have a full-time job and other responsibilities that prevent me from spending much time on court cases, other than the most essential.
My point, from the get-go, has been that the current system does not permit a proper challenge for a stolen presidential election. What there is is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing to warrant a lawsuit and discovery. There was never any discovery allowed (actually, "never" is an overstatement -- in a couple instances there was, I believe, but the artificial time constraints are insurmountable.
Plouffe's strategy encompassed that awareness -- that you don't have to win, all you have to do is convince people you won, as no legitimate challenge to the findings will be permitted. And they were correct. The USSC slammed the door shut, even before state courts had allowed any examination of the evidence in hand. It was pathetic.
One day there will be a proper re-investigation of it. I doubt I'm going to reading any of those cases I haven't already read, unless something new develops. The race was clearly stolen.
Now, you guys have do deal with what you created. Trillions in debt, reversing Trump's economic success with corporate tax cuts, 20,000 children in cages on the border -- perhaps soon to be 200,000 (which seems perfectly fine with you now, although I'm guessing you disapproved four years ago when a fraction of those numbers were housed for a few days, providing transparency).
I think the entire lot of Democrat voters are just duplicitous from the ground up. |
