Do you guys have a comment on the substance?
Do you think it’s a logical thing to do to first certify a fraudulent election and then bring it to court?
Wouldn’t that make it harder to undo?
BC you and cyber ninjas and trump say it so?
Get the fuck out of my country you fucking immigrant.
Fake ass foreigners trying to destroy good ole america
No you dummy. The judge is saying even if it is fraudulent. Keep up.
I remember one time when GSC said posters on here wouldn’t stop talking about the Russia investigation.
Christ - trump could be re-elected in 2024 GSC would still be talking about 2020 4 years after that.
So no answer to my question still?
There’s no answer to give when there isn’t any evidence.
Omg - you just don’t want to answer.
How the hell do you know if there is evidence or not? Did you read the complaint?
In any event, I’m asking a question about the judges ruling. She didn’t say “there’s no evidence.”
She said “it needs to be certified before the court can hear the matter” (paraphrasing).
So answer the question.
Because you didn’t provide any? Just like you’ve provided next to no evidence over the last 2 years claiming widespread fraud?
The GOP needs to move on from Trump. He’s killing them.
Is this what you are claiming some kind of victory?
While dismissed for now, Hamadeh still could file a complaint later, after the expected statewide certification of the election.
Lmfao
What a joke.
Your “news” source?
The judges decision.
To follow the law?
Cite the statute the judge followed.
Zero evidence of fraud. You just don’t like reality
Also, the Gateway Pundit is not a news organization or a journalistic organization. It’s a propaganda rag who employs two brothers who lie on a daily basis and children like this author
I mean, the first paragraph clearly shows it to be nothing but partisan slop and propaganda.
What’s hilarious to me is how many times so far I’ve seen GOPers, like this guy, gripe about Republicans having to wait in long lines and how old they are and how they shouldn’t have to wait
That wasn’t the ruling
So, where’s your proof? The ruling isn’t the issue…the fact you have no evidence of fraud yet deny the elections is the issue. So, where’s the beef?
Apparently GSC believes that his opinion is proof in and of itself
You guys keep asking for proof. Read the filing. They lost a bunch of evidentiary points like machines breaking, voters being restricted from voting, ballot issues, etc….
But this isn’t my question. Stay on target.
Apparently you keep wanting to bring it to proof when I’m simply asking for an opinion on the judges decision. Why can’t you guys just answer the question?