John Maplethorpe said:

---

JP_Losman said:

---

it is not Trump who signed thousands of affidavits.

Thousands of citizens are accusing the election officials of fraud in these precincts

---

I have an affidavit regarding bigfoot. Take it to the FBI or court and see if it survives cross.

---

I have an affidavit stating that the Hokey Pokey is not, in fact, what it is all about. I demand a federal investigation into what the Hokey Pokey is truly about. We will be filing an emergency petition in the United States Supreme Court to resolve this critical issue before the electoral college meets.

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

John Maplethorpe said:

---

This would be a great precedent - states go around reversing other states elections based on narrow legal technicalities in how they were operated.

---

NY threatened to sue Rhode Island because of their internal CV 19 regulations in restricting travelers from NY. Then NY in turn began trying to regulate travelers coming in to their state. Nothing new here.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

The affidavits are a mix of eyewitness testimony often explained innocuously, internet filled forms, and "experts" that aren't experts speculating about things.

There are a few probably that deserve investigation I don't have a problem with it, but these grand conspiracies from Powell and gang are completely ridiculous. Dominion is gonna sue her ass off.

---

Powell is a cook.

So what.

Corroborating affidavits about boxes of ballots being wheeled in the back door after most poll workers were told to go home are not something to brush away as a conspiracy.

It is clearly against election law, and it creates an appearance of impropriety.

For as cooky as some of the Powell arguments are, you are equally overly dismissive of things that are clearly illegal, have substantial proof, and create very important, troubling questions.

That's funny though

They weren't wheeled in the "back door". They were opened in front of Republican poll watchers, sorted, and tracked on video all day.

There was an investigation and it's a bridge too far to seriously believe Republicans in Georgia hacked their own election.

Edit - maybe you were referencing something else
If you're talking about the affidavits mentioning "vans" and "out of state" license plates go check out how some of these witnesses have done under cross- it ain't good.

Trump would need 3 of those 4 to flip the election. Are these individual suits or is it an all or nothing scenario?

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

---

This is carefully worded.

"for missing or non-matching signatures"

Also, the rejection rate from 2016 was 6.42%. Huge drop there.

Pages 64 of the document at https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/SCOTUSFiling.pdf say

Quote:

---

Without Defendant States' combined 62 electoral votes, President Trump presumably has 232 electoral
votes, and former Vice President Biden presumably has 244. Thus, Defendant States' presidential electors will determine the outcome of the election. Alternatively, if Defendant States are unable to certify 37 or more presidential electors, neither candidate will have a majority in the electoral college, in which case the election would devolve to the House of Representatives under the Twelfth Amendment.

---

I don't believe this is correct. In this claim, there would only be 476 certified electoral voters and a majority would be 239.

From Article XII:

Quote:

---

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.

---

To stay with the 470 electoral votes needed to win, then those electors who's vote is ignored would have to be considered eligible to vote in the Electoral College without being certified by the state.

TAMC11 said:

---

Trump would need 3 of those 4 to flip the election. Are these individual suits or is it an all or nothing scenario?

---

It's one suit.

SCOTUS will likely not hear this.

Even if they do, it would be really, really far fetched that SCOTUS would enjoin all four of those states from sending electors.

IMO, this is mostly about keeping the attention on the illegal activities of the executive branches of these four states, flagrantly breaking their own laws, and keeping the Dems from declaring victory until the last possible moment.

I think that the odds that we see debate on Jan 6th about accepting electors are going up each day, though.

That is really the right place to settle this.

The GOP doesn't have the votes in the House, and Dems are not likely to break ranks unless there is a crazy bombshell between now and January 6th. But this does help push back the deadline to then.

BusterAg said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

---

This is carefully worded.

"for missing or non-matching signatures"

Also, the rejection rate from 2016 was 6.42%. Huge drop there.

---

The rejection rate for "all reasons" haven't been reported yet. The signature rejection rate is in line with past years. The people peddling these apple-orange comparisons are effectively lying.

eric76 said:

---

Pages 64 of the document at https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/SCOTUSFiling.pdf say

Quote:

---

Without Defendant States' combined 62 electoral votes, President Trump presumably has 232 electoral
votes, and former Vice President Biden presumably has 244. Thus, Defendant States' presidential electors will determine the outcome of the election. Alternatively, if Defendant States are unable to certify 37 or more presidential electors, neither candidate will have a majority in the electoral college, in which case the election would devolve to the House of Representatives under the Twelfth Amendment.

---

I don't believe this is correct. In this claim, there would only be 476 certified electoral voters and a majority would be 239.

From Article XII:

Quote:

---

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.

---

To stay with the 470 electoral votes needed to win, then those electors who's vote is ignored would have to be considered eligible to vote in the Electoral College without being certified by the state.

---

You keep repeating this like it is settled law. It isn't.

If you were intellectually honest, you would give both sides to the issue.

For posters that want more background, thread is here: https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3162547/1

eric76 said:

---

I don't believe this is correct. In this claim, there would only be 476 certified electoral voters and a majority would be 239.

---

The good thing is, we don't have to rely on what you think

If the SC takes it up we, will find out their interpretation, maybe. This is still a crap shoot.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

---

This is carefully worded.

"for missing or non-matching signatures"

Also, the rejection rate from 2016 was 6.42%. Huge drop there.

---

The rejection rate for "all reasons" haven't been reported yet. The signature rejection rate is in line with past years. The people peddling these apple-orange comparisons are effectively lying.

---

Years? 2018 and the primary? What about before that?

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

EDHEC Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures. Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Finally, Texas argues that there were "voting irregularities" in these states as a result of the above.

Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors.

---

Link

---

So what harm does the suit say Texas (the state or on behalf of the people?) suffered?

---

The will of the people was circumvented and you have no problem with that

---

I was question about the content of the suit. I missed the details TBL posted. It's been answered. Now, how you got that I have a problem with it, I'm not sure. Did your aunt Flo come early this month?

GeorgiAg said:

---

Somebody wants a pardon...

---

The window for sucking up is definitely closing.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

---

This is carefully worded.

"for missing or non-matching signatures"

Also, the rejection rate from 2016 was 6.42%. Huge drop there.

---

The rejection rate for "all reasons" haven't been reported yet. The signature rejection rate is in line with past years. The people peddling these apple-orange comparisons are effectively lying.

---

That's rich, coming from you.

You are the master of dealing with half truths and misconstruing what other people say to make a point in your argument.

For example, you keep repeating "no widespread fraud."

Would you be so kind as to admit that election officials in all four states violated election law in their own states? Blatantly?

BusterAg said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

---

This is carefully worded.

"for missing or non-matching signatures"

Also, the rejection rate from 2016 was 6.42%. Huge drop there.

---

The rejection rate for "all reasons" haven't been reported yet. The signature rejection rate is in line with past years. The people peddling these apple-orange comparisons are effectively lying.

---

Years? 2018 and the primary? What about before that?

---

2016 was 0.24% for signatures.
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/georgia-press-conference-on-election-count-updates-transcript-november-17

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Bless your heart you think this is a real thing that might happen.

---

SCOTUS taking up a case to address this?

It could.

Likely won't matter, but SCOTUS really could take it up if we have any meaningful number of electors rejected.

BusterAg said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

And historical 3% ballot rejection now down to 0.3% this year (a year loaded with mail in ballots).

---

You know these numbers can be checked and verified at the Georgia SOS? You don't have to accept the made up numbers you saw on Twitter.

---

You don't believe the low ballot rejection numbers this year?

---

Quote:

---

The rejection rate for absentee ballots with missing or non-matching signatures in the 2020 General Election was 0.15%, the same rejection rate for signature issues as the 2018 General Election.

---

https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/number_of_absentee_ballots_rejected_for_signature_issues_in_the_2020_election_increased_350_from_2018

---

This is carefully worded.

"for missing or non-matching signatures"

Also, the rejection rate from 2016 was 6.42%. Huge drop there.

---

Go to the 28 minute mark and listen for a few minutes. That's Ralph Jones, Sr. election supervisor in State Farm Arena in Fulton County. He's talking about rejected ballots and ballot adjudication. Guy isn't that smart nor articulate so it is confusing what he is actually saying. Take a listen and see what you think, please.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Bless your heart you think this is a real thing that might happen.

---

You have a genuine comprehension problem

I never said they would take it up.

As a practical person, I tend to consider all possibilities not just the popular possibilities

It is a possibility they take it up, and if they do, all bets are off with regards to possible outcomes, in my opinion?

I don't understand your condescension, do you get paid by the post?

Old McDonald said:

---

coolerguy12 said:

---

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Quote:

---

Well there was this busted water pipe in Fulton Co with weird statistic aborrations. a few lines of SQL code and I can throw away all kinds of stuff

Delete from voterec where recID equals whateverIWant
//then walks to the shredder

---

When one facet of the conspiracy fails simply introduce a larger more implausible conspiracy.

---

From the party of Russia, Russia, Russia ladies and gentlemen.

---

"the left believed this one hoax so we can believe this other one"

---

Ukraine says hi. Oh and the emoluments hoax extends its greetings.

Both of which were based on anonymous sources. Both of which were shown to be lies once the super secret sworn statements by alleged eye witnesses were the exact opposite of the incredible yarns/lies told repeatedly by bag of Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, Swallwell and other all knowing elitist scum buckets the minions follow with religious zeal.

A majority of senators including several Republicans said Trump was guilty on the facts on impeachment, just not worthy of removal.

Sidney's wild fantasies are nothing like that.

richardag said:

---

Ukraine says hi. Oh and the emoluments hoax extends its greetings.

Both of which were based on anonymous sources. Both of which were shown to be lies once the super secret sworn statements by alleged eye witnesses were the exact opposite of the incredible yarns/lies told repeatedly by bag of Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, Swallwell and other all knowing elitist scum buckets the minions follow with religious zeal.

---

And the projection became apparent after looking into Hunter Biden and the various Clinton Foundations

John Maplethorpe said:

---

A majority of senators including several Republicans said Trump was guilty on the facts on impeachment, just not worthy of removal.

Sidney's wild fantasies are nothing like that.

---

Senators Lamar Alexander, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Rob Portman, Mitt Romney, and Ben Sasse.

mostly known Rinos and never trumpers...k

John Maplethorpe said:

---

A majority of senators including several Republicans said Trump was guilty on the facts on impeachment, just not worthy of removal.

Sidney's wild fantasies are nothing like that.

---

the impeachment is basically a litmus test for morons and useful idiots. trying to cite "a majority of senators" is like cheating on the test and still failing.

Mr. Jones is appearing to say that he has the ability to cure rejected ballots.

He rejected 363 ballots that can be "cured". They adjudicated 1,800 on previous days.

Adjudication is just, when you don't know whether to count it, you have to have multiple poll workers look at them. I don't think that adjudication and rejection are the same thing.

However, to cure, the code is very specific on how to cure:

(C) If the elector has failed to sign the oath, or if the signature does not appear to be valid, or if the elector has failed to furnish required information or information so furnished does not conform with that on file in the registrar's or clerk's office, or if the elector is otherwise found disqualified to vote, the registrar or clerk shall write across the face of the envelope "Rejected," giving the reason therefor. The board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk shall promptly notify the elector of such rejection, a copy of which notification shall be retained in the files of the board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk for at least two years. Such elector shall have until the end of the period for verifying provisional ballots contained in subsection (c) of Code Section 21-2-419 to cure the problem resulting in the rejection of the ballot. The elector may cure a failure to sign the oath, an invalid signature, or missing information by submitting an affidavit to the board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk along with a copy of one of the forms of identification enumerated in subsection (c) of Code Section 21-2-417 before the close of such period. The affidavit shall affirm that the ballot was submitted by the elector, is the elector's ballot, and that the elector is registered and qualified to vote in the primary, election, or runoff in question. If the board of registrars or absentee ballot clerk finds the affidavit and identification to be sufficient, the absentee ballot shall be counted.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ga/title-21-elections/ga-code-sect-21-2-386.html

The GA election official is required to keep these affidavits on file. I wonder if they have all been produced?

Did I answer your question? Did I miss something?

BusterAg said:

---

TAMC11 said:

---

Trump would need 3 of those 4 to flip the election. Are these individual suits or is it an all or nothing scenario?

---

It's one suit.

SCOTUS will likely not hear this.

Even if they do, it would be really, really far fetched that SCOTUS would enjoin all four of those states from sending electors.

IMO, this is mostly about keeping the attention on the illegal activities of the executive branches of these four states, flagrantly breaking their own laws, and keeping the Dems from declaring victory until the last possible moment.

I think that the odds that we see debate on Jan 6th about accepting electors are going up each day, though.

That is really the right place to settle this.

The GOP doesn't have the votes in the House, and Dems are not likely to break ranks unless there is a crazy bombshell between now and January 6th. But this does help push back the deadline to then.

---

Oh yes they do in the house

John Maplethorpe said:

---

A majority of senators including several Republicans said Trump was guilty on the facts on impeachment, just not worthy of removal.

Sidney's wild fantasies are nothing like that.

---

Lol at Romney being used as "bi partisan"

John Maplethorpe said:

---

A majority of senators including several Republicans said Trump was guilty on the facts on impeachment, just not worthy of removal.

Sidney's wild fantasies are nothing like that.

---

Really.

Guilty of what, exactly?

You have a cite for this?

Quote:

---

Did I answer your question? Did I miss something?

---

Pretty much. I was getting hung up on the rejection rate which really wasn't the rejection rate, it was an adjudication issue wherein they supposedly could divine the intent of the voters.

Thanks.

TAMU1990 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

TAMC11 said:

---

Trump would need 3 of those 4 to flip the election. Are these individual suits or is it an all or nothing scenario?

---

It's one suit.

SCOTUS will likely not hear this.

Even if they do, it would be really, really far fetched that SCOTUS would enjoin all four of those states from sending electors.

IMO, this is mostly about keeping the attention on the illegal activities of the executive branches of these four states, flagrantly breaking their own laws, and keeping the Dems from declaring victory until the last possible moment.

I think that the odds that we see debate on Jan 6th about accepting electors are going up each day, though.

That is really the right place to settle this.

The GOP doesn't have the votes in the House, and Dems are not likely to break ranks unless there is a crazy bombshell between now and January 6th. But this does help push back the deadline to then.

---

Oh yes they do in the house

---

I'm pretty sure, when voting on whether or not to accept electors, it is done by majority vote.

If you move to a contingent election, when you are voting for president (not when you are voting on whether or not to accept electors) then you vote in the house 1 state, 1 vote.

It's two separate votes.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

A majority of senators including several Republicans said Trump was guilty on the facts on impeachment, just not worthy of removal.

Sidney's wild fantasies are nothing like that.

---

Yet EVERY WITNESS the Democrats obtained sworn testimony from in closed meetings said CATEGORICALLY they saw no illegal actions, none zero nada. While still sealed testimony, the lying POSs bag of Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, Swallwell and others lied about these witnesses' testimony. It wasn't until the testimony became public was it revealed the entire episode was a political hit job and farce.

Your hate and delusions warp your sense of reality.