You’re misunderstanding courts if you think lawsuits without basis are valid. Court is not for hypotheticals that are in disagreement with the facts. That’s called a frivolous lawsuit.
1 Like
You are misunderstanding. Frivolous lawsuits arent declared so upfront, as you so desperately want to do with these election issues. Every case is a valid lawsuit until it is determined to be otherwise. It is concluded that they are frivolous only after being filed and reviewed, based on the case being presented.
Semantics. There is no “case” with no evidence (or specific claims).
Sure, the court will review what’s provided. But if nothing was provided, it’s over… and in normal circumstances the court would levy penalties.
No, it’s not semantics. That’s your whole problem. There’s a huge difference between the court looking at the argument and determining that there is no case, and you simply declaring “just trust me, there is no case.”
Which I have not declared… there is no case “yet” … if and when any evidence is presented in court, then the wild claims are worthy of discussion. After the court decides that they have merit. And at that point they would not be “baseless”, either.
It is not “no harm” to throw around baseless and fraudulent claims of fraud. It is damaging to the public trust. As well as providing recruitment propaganda for the extremist terrorist groups.
1 Like
I’m going way back to L. Lin Wood, an American attorney. This attorney is a well known, very respected, & also a high power lawyer. He has solid evidence coming to him right now.
If true there are 900 military ballots & every single one voted for Biden. Then fraud, deceit, corruption. is following Joe Biden. (as well it should)
I have followed Lin Wood attorney for several years & I’ll bet my last $ that he wins this case. 
Wow crazy emails in the ongoing lawsuit.
Guess the qanon and other garbage may end up being explained by him simply being “unwell”.
Bender, you won’t give up!!
Deep search, The Enquirer… Oh well, old news… 
Maybe you should use the word “fact-check”, rather than verify. They seem to like the idea of fact-checking.
Unfortunately, the so-called fact checkers rarely deal in facts, they simply simply decide if there’s a fact tied to the claim.
Truly checking the facts (ie, verifying) the claim that these 900 ballots were all for Biden, wouldnt produce a “False! Baseless! You cant prove it!” response. True verification would produce a response more like “There were 1800 such ballots cast, which were split 50/50 between Biden and Trump. 100% of the 900 votes being for Biden is because that 900 is his portion of the total cast.” I’ve yet to see such a response; the go-to is always to merely attack the claim being made with an equally baseless dismissal.
Republicans: “Biden is a super-genius who is running a massive plot to steal the election that left no evidence, and he is grifting all over the place. Also, Biden is a dementia patient who can barely string together a sentence and has so little energy we call him Sleepy Joe.”
2 Likes
Yes!! Massive plot to steal this election.
Biden hasn’t worked on his election. He stayed in the basement & let the media & democrats handle it.
So you’re correct he has dementia, & we call him Sleepy Joe.
1 Like
Has anyone claimed Biden has orchestrated anything? Or is he just the beneficiary?
Has anyone claimed Biden has orchestrated anything? Or is he just the beneficiary?
I have seen quite a few ridiculous claims related to him being the “head of the Biden crime family”…
Let the paybacks begin. What are her qualifications to be an ambassador, besides railing against Trump?
1 Like
Figurehead?
I don’t know that there’s anything to determine that he’s been leading, looking the other way, or completely oblivious to the things that have been batted around.
Eric Clapton releases a song against Covid lockdowns.
So of course, obviously, the correct response is to dredge up a racial comment he made during a concert 44 years ago.
That’ll teach him not to step out of line…
1 Like
Why yes, this story about the GOP blocking election security legislation is 10 months old. Remember that when they complain about “stolen elections” and “massive fraud”.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/482569-senate-gop-blocks-three-election-security-bills
1 Like
I agree. Clearly they should not.
1 Like
That’s a fair point. But I’d wonder what else was included in the bills, underneath the headline purposes.
And, that article points out that this happened soon after an additional $425 million in election security funding was in fact passed.
But like I said, it is a fair point.
Crazy lib