January 12, 2021 at 9:46 am #603BobHatcherParticipant
This state rep in PA asserts there was 220,000 more votes cast than voters who submitted ballots.
February 16, 2021 at 8:23 pm #1184Robert HatcherKeymaster
Claudia Tenney finally won her race for the US House in New York. Here’s what the judge said:
Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte criticized local elections boards for what he said were “systemic violations of state and federal election law” that affected both parties. But that’s up to the state board of elections, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the U.S. Department of Justice to handle, not his court, he said. He also noted that for all the errors, there was no fraud.
February 23, 2021 at 9:54 am #1304BobHatcherParticipant
The Supreme Court refused to hear the challenge to the Pennslvania voting irregularities. Here is a great article from the Epoch Times on the subject. I’ve attached his dissent. Note it’s a long document and his stuff starts at page 25.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion regarding the high court’s decision not to take up a case challenging the Pennsylvania Nov. 3 election results.
The court on Monday announced it won’t take up lawsuits challenging a Pennsylvania state court decision that relaxed ballot-integrity measures, including a move to extend the ballot-receipt deadline during the November election by three days due to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. Former President Donald Trump and Pennsylvania’s GOP urged the court to take up a review of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling.
“This is not a prescription for confidence,” Thomas wrote on Monday, adding that “changing the rules in the middle of the game is bad enough.” Thomas, considered by many to be the most conservative justice, said the court should have granted a review.
“That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future,” Thomas wrote pdf below. “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”
Other than Thomas, Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch also dissented.
“If state officials have the authority they have claimed, we need to make it clear. If not, we need to put an end to this practice now before the consequences become catastrophic,” Thomas, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush, also wrote.
Thomas also appeared to make a reference to allegations of fraud and irregularities during the Nov. 3 election.
“We are fortunate that many of the cases we have seen alleged only improper rule changes, not fraud,” Thomas wrote. “But that observation provides only small comfort. An election free from strong evidence of systemic fraud is not alone sufficient for election confidence. Also important is the assurance that fraud will not go undetected.”
The Supreme Court on Monday also declined to review a bid by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) and others who asked the court to strike down a policy that expanded mail-in ballots.
A lawyer for Kelly, Greg Teufel, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last week that “it’s important the court should take an interest in whether Pennsylvania’s election laws are administered constitutionally or not, and in accordance with the Pennsylvania constitution and with the federal constitution.” Teufel noted that before the court’s decision on Monday, there was a slim chance of the justices taking it up.
Trump still has a request on the Supreme Court docket regarding his challenge to changes that the Wisconsin Election Commission ordered last year.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.