To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1300752 ) 5/17/2021 12:10:48 PM From: i-node 2 RecommendationsRecommended By Mick Mørmøny Winfastorlose
Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1580455 No, it doesn't make it "legal". It means a particular court turned a blind eye to it and decided to let it happen. One court, one judge, one carefully chosen judge. Now, it DID allow you to steal the election. But it didn't make it "legal". It just made it so you can get away with it. But more information is coming in about what actually happened, and it looks pretty bad. For example:Now, in a report at the Thomas More Society, Erick Kaardal, a special counsel with the project, said documents that have been obtained confirm “election officials from the five largest Wisconsin cities – Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, Racine and Kenosha … adopted and implemented private corporate conditions, including direct corporate and corporate employee engagement in the administration of the general election. ” “Moreover, the mayors of Milwaukee, Madison, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay agreed in private meetings to place the same corporate conditions on their election administration. These are the five largest cities in Wisconsin. The private corporations through engaging in these five cities’ election administration hoped to conduct outreach and target certain neighborhoods and communities for extra voting information, to register more voters and to obtain more votes and absentee votes ,” he reported. ================ If you simply read the above that is clearly unconstitutional, violating the Equal Protection Clause. But it is graft by any metric. Why should Arnold and Zuck be able to buy the ability to control how many Democrats vote versus Republicans?This is how you stole the election.