I'm no legal scholar, but I think they are saying they choose to ignore the Constitution to avoid making people feel bad. Am I close? https://twitter.com/tracybeanz/status/1332830580325699585 …
-
-
they would never have filed had they won.
-
Yes, because you're not allowed to file if you won
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
1) I’m not a lawyer either so we’re both spitballin. I voted for Trump & I suspect that there was significant fraud, enough potentially to overturn the presidential outcome. That said, I don’t think these judges were making law. Their judgment was that now was the worst time >>>
-
2) To challenge this rule change. I do not disagree with them. It seems the timing of this lawsuit was incredibly self-serving. They would not have filed this lawsuit if they had won. I think the best chance for exposing fraud are the Powell fraud cases in GA & MI. >>>
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Also when Trump appointees rule this decisively against u over and over u might be the problem.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's called "Laches."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Additionally, the judges made mention of the doctrine of laches and they also cited a case that seems to set a precedent for acting with due diligence on a matter.pic.twitter.com/k58u3Rxogz
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
That’s not our only source of law.
End of conversation
-
-
-
It doesn’t. They, the Dems, tried to mess with the mechanics of the election process precisely so they could circumvent the laws. The PA legislature is going to have to act on this and pick the electors.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.