Civilized said:
caryking said:
Civilized said:
Werewolf said:
This goes back to the 2020 election and Jan 06th if you choose to listen.
We all listened, including the courts. There was nothing to hear.
Consequential electoral fraud is a fantasy.
That's like saying.. OJ didn't do it!
We all know he did it; however, a legal process found him not guilty. Civ, your arguments are extremely weak! If you don't believe the narrative, then that's fine; however, standing on your tired argument is another…
The legal process didn't declare OJ not guilty. The prosecutors were unable to meet the required burden of proof.
Huge difference between OJ and electoral fraud.
There was significant circumstantial evidence presented in court that OJ was guilty. In the case of electoral fraud, no evidence of consequence has been brought forth and substantiated in courts that lead any judge at any time to believe consequential fraud was present.
Furthermore, there is not any circumstantial evidence (that has not been debunked) to indicate electoral fraud happened either.
Frankly I've got to say I was quite pleasantly surprised at how little talk of fraud there was this cycle, other than Kari Lake and her loons.
Even if such a stance is politically motivated since most politicians across the spectrum realized before these elections that fake electoral fraud was a loser at the polls, I'm glad that's where we ended up.
I'd certainly rather end up in the right place for the wrong reason then not end up there at all.
You obviously didn't listen to the video.
This case that the SCOTUS has now decided to hear...........is one of maybe 100-150........out of maybe 1,500 to 2,000 submitted. SCOTUS didn't arbitrarily pick this case.......there is a reason.
What occurred: 380ish members of Congress --out of the 535 -- when presented with Director of National Intelligence info that hacking of our election occurred
The issue to be considered by the SCOTUS is: Congress did not take the Constitutionally required 10-day pause to consider the DNI's report that evidence showed election interference. .Congress should have considered the details of the evidence from Jan 06 to Jan 16. They did NOT.
Ratcliff's DNI report was delayed and not presented to Congress until around Jan 03rd or thereabouts. There is a timeframe that was required for this report, and it was around Dec 17th or so... The DNI report was late because the 17 national security agencies delayed beyond this Dec 17 date.......again, delivery on our about Jan 03rd to DNI Ratcliff. DNI Ratcliff's report may not have reached Congress until Jan 5th or so.
The DNI report -- abbreviated due to being squeezed of time -- showed foreign interference. Congress took the position that there was no evidence to prove that the foreign interference was substantial enough to alter the outcome of the election. But in doing so, Congress did not provide 10-day delay to review the evidence.
Good Lord, I'm typing much more than I want to.... if you don't understand then consider listening to the video.
The SCOTUS is considering the Constitutional requirements of what was to occur from Nov 03, 2020 to Jan 20, 2021...............and what did not. The 10-days did not occur. SCOTUS decision could go other way......but I would suggest ..........why consider.........if the lower courts had said nothing was wrong
As I said, we'll see.
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
