more harm to america from trump's anti-american election lies

[pjmret]

If no judge investigated all the available evidence or ruled against the limited evidence he examined his ruling cannot be accepted as either far-reaching or irrefutable.

nope. judges dont investigate, they evaluate evidence provided by those claiming fraud.
you clearly are a legal mor on who seems to enjoy looking stupid

 

[mark francis]

nope. judges dont investigate, they evaluate evidence provided by those claiming fraud.
you clearly are a legal mor on who seems to enjoy looking stupid

Judges don't investigate so they have no access to all the evidence of fraud they would need to have examined and understood in order to declare that the evidence proves no significant fraud occurred, which no judge in th ecountry ever ruled. If anything, judges have proved the legitimacy of the voting fraud evidence by not declaring that the evidence proves no significant fraud took place.

 

[pjmret]

Judges don't investigate so they have no access to all the evidence of fraud they would need to have examined and understood in order to declare that the evidence proves no significant fraud occurred, which no judge in th ecountry ever ruled. If anything, judges have proved the legitimacy of the voting fraud evidence by not declaring that the evidence proves no significant fraud took place.

It's up to your mor ons to get the evidence
Cla8ming fraud without credible evidence is anti-American

And since judges won't declare that fraud doesn't exist regardless, it doesn't make the evidence legitimate

Why do you enjoy looking stupid?

 

[pjmret]

Judges don't investigate so they have no access to all the evidence of fraud they would need to have examined and understood in order to declare that the evidence proves no significant fraud occurred, which no judge in th ecountry ever ruled. If anything, judges have proved the legitimacy of the voting fraud evidence by not declaring that the evidence proves no significant fraud took place.

Evidence is legitimate if you win duh
And you didn't duh
God you are stupid lol

 

[mark francis]

It's up to your mor ons to get the evidence
Cla8ming fraud without credible evidence is anti-American

And since judges won't declare that fraud doesn't exist regardless, it doesn't make the evidence legitimate

Why do you enjoy looking stupid?

We might as well leave judges out of this, especially since so many judges dismissed voting fraud cases long before serious investigations into the credible evidence of fraud had even begun.

 

[pjmret]

We might as well leave judges out of this, especially since so many judges dismissed voting fraud cases long before serious investigations into the credible evidence of fraud had even begun.

which cases were dismissed, legal idiot. list them. lol
why aern't you dont investigations now, idiot? lol

 

[mark francis]

which cases were dismissed, legal idiot. list them. lol
why aern't you dont investigations now, idiot? lol

No matter. No court case rejected before fraud investigations had been initiated and completed has any bearing on the current subject of 2020 voting fraud.

 

[pjmret]

No matter. No court case rejected before fraud investigations had been initiated and completed has any bearing on the current subject of 2020 voting fraud.

No matter lol
You keep whining about the fraud you idiots can't prove lol

You enjoy looking stupid

 

[Boris Norris]

No matter. No court case rejected before fraud investigations had been initiated and completed has any bearing on the current subject of 2020 voting fraud.

What other cases are you talking about?

 

[pjmret]

No matter. No court case rejected before fraud investigations had been initiated and completed has any bearing on the current subject of 2020 voting fraud.

what court cases were rejected for invalid reasons, lying idiot? lol.

in the "current subject" of 2020 fraud you idiots still can't find any credible evidence to support your whining. lol.

its rare to find complete and total losers like this, but you idiots have achieved that status!

 

[mark francis]

what court cases were rejected for invalid reasons, lying idiot? lol.

in the "current subject" of 2020 fraud you idiots still can't find any credible evidence to support your whining. lol.

its rare to find complete and total losers like this, but you idiots have achieved that status!

Who cares what the judges said? They rejected voter fraud cases before the investigations into the evidnece had even seriously started. There were no juries involved. The judges never examined the evidence and never held hearings from investigators on both sides od the controversies.

 

[pjmret]

Who cares what the judges said? They rejected voter fraud cases before the investigations into the evidnece had even seriously started. There were no juries involved. The judges never examined the evidence and never held hearings from investigators on both sides od the controversies.

who cares what judges say? lol. god you are so stupid.
the whole purpose of judges is to evaluate how credible evidence is in accusations of fraud. hahahahahahhaha

again, list cases that were rejected, lying idiot. you never do. lol
no juries involved? yes, they dont go to juries. god you are stupid. lol.
and yes the judges examined the evidence, its what judges do. god you are stupid.

i hope you get paid to look this stupid. lol

 

[mark francis]

who cares what judges say? lol. god you are so stupid.
the whole purpose of judges is to evaluate how credible evidence is in accusations of fraud. hahahahahahhaha

Deceivers have deluded Americans into falsely believing judges thoroughly examined all the voting fraud evidence available and concluded that none of the evidence showed democrat fraud. There are many reasons claiming the judges proved no democrat fraud took place. First, the rulings came too soon after the election for there to have been time enough to conduct the type of thorough examinations of the evidence for conclusions about the evidence to have been worth consideration. Secondly, courts were not allowed to examine forensic evaluations of voting machines because democrats blocked nearly all attempts to investigate voting machines. Third, no government body provided INS records to the court to prove questionable ballots were not cast by illegals. Fourth, no court proved unmatching signatures on counted ballots were legitimate. And so forth.

 

[pjmret]

Deceivers have deluded Americans into falsely believing judges thoroughly examined all the voting fraud evidence available and concluded that none of the evidence showed democrat fraud. There are many reasons claiming the judges proved no democrat fraud took place. First, the rulings came too soon after the election for there to have been time enough to conduct the type of thorough examinations of the evidence for conclusions about the evidence to have been worth consideration. Secondly, courts were not allowed to examine forensic evaluations of voting machines because democrats blocked nearly all attempts to investigate voting machines. Third, no government body provided INS records to the court to prove questionable ballots were not cast by illegals. Fourth, no court proved unmatching signatures on counted ballots were legitimate. And so forth.

well, they did evaluate all the evidence available when you lying idiots claimed there was fraud.
and they concluded the evidence did not credibly prove fraud.
thats how courts work, legal idiot.

the burden of proof is on you idiots.
why are you so stupid and lazy? lol

 

[mark francis]

well, they did evaluate all the evidence available when you lying idiots claimed there was fraud.
and they concluded the evidence did not credibly prove fraud.
thats how courts work, legal idiot.

They briefly examined maybe .02% of all voting fraud evidence and ruled without involving juries or reational debate that the very limited evidence they looked over briefly did not persuade them there was widespread voter fraud across the nation in 2020.