Post Reply
1 of 1
PA Judge Blocks Certification?
3,458 Views |
26 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by TRADUCTOR
I'm confused too. But this is in state court not federal and appears unrelated to the Trump campaign.
From Tigerdroppings:
"SOS has to certify and then send to state for approval.
It is a 2 step process..."
Paragraph 1 enjoins the final steps of certification from being completed;
Paragraph 2 enjoins the certification of outstanding results.
"SOS has to certify and then send to state for approval.
It is a 2 step process..."
Paragraph 1 enjoins the final steps of certification from being completed;
Paragraph 2 enjoins the certification of outstanding results.
I have little hope left, but it's still there. After just reading an article claiming trump must be prosecuted for all of his many "crimes" while in office to unify us, I want the world to burn.
In said article, it said the impeachment case had "overwhelming evidence" and that the dems were simply outmaneuvered lol.
In said article, it said the impeachment case had "overwhelming evidence" and that the dems were simply outmaneuvered lol.
aggiehawg said:
I'm confused too. But this is in state court not federal and appears unrelated to the Trump campaign.
My untrained opinion is a state injunction is stronger and more legitimate than a federal one. The GOP in AZ, GA, and PA were always going to be the ones to do the heavy lifting, because it's THEIR election and THEIR election officials.
Elections are when people find out what politicians stand for, and politicians find out what people will fall for.
- Alfred E. Neuman
- Alfred E. Neuman
Evidentiary hearing this Friday.
(Edited - case isn't about fraud)
(Edited - case isn't about fraud)
I believe this is the case that argues the mail in voting passed by Pennsylvania is invalid because it required amendment to PA constitution.
Don't know what other claims they have in the case
Don't know what other claims they have in the case
Don't think this is a fraud case. This case is about the constitutionality of Pennsylvania statute Act 77.Faustus said:
Evidentiary hearing this Friday.
I think this is great. Weigh the evidence, and if there's fraud root it out, and if not the board will agree and we'll move on.
My error.
This is an interesting turn of events then.
This is an interesting turn of events then.
Shakes the Clown
Joined:
Mar 5, 2019
Posts:
4,450
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The order does nothing. Certification has already happened and been perfected. Any other administrative things done later are outside of the scope of certification.
Wrong. Until the certificate of ascertainment signed by Gov. Wolf is transmitted to the National Archives, the election is not fully certified.HTownAg98 said:
The order does nothing. Certification has already happened and been perfected. Any other administrative things done later are outside of the scope of certification.
The governor already did that.
I could find no news story that stated the transmittal to the archives had taken place. Only that Wolf had signed off.HTownAg98 said:
The governor already did that.
Fair enough. I stand corrected.HTownAg98 said:
https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2020/11/24/pennsylvania-certifies-biden-winner-presidential-vote/
Don't believe this case has any fraud allegations
BMX Bandit said:
Don't believe this case has any fraud allegations
Fraud is not the legal hurdle needed. A good faith error, or unconstitutional policy could have included thousands of illegal votes.
I know.
Pointing that out beside people are already using this as evidence fraud occurred. This case had nothing to do with Dominion or ballot stuffing allegations
Pointing that out beside people are already using this as evidence fraud occurred. This case had nothing to do with Dominion or ballot stuffing allegations
BMX Bandit said:
I know.
Pointing that out beside people are already using this as evidence fraud occurred. This case had nothing to do with Dominion or ballot stuffing allegations
I agree. I apologize for pouncing on you. Colloquially, I think describing a judge snd SOS writing VBM laws out of thin air as "fraudulent" is common. Using more precise language is important in these matters.
BMX Bandit said:
I know.
Pointing that out beside people are already using this as evidence fraud occurred. This case had nothing to do with Dominion or ballot stuffing allegations
It's a comorbidity of ballot stuffing.