benalvino2:


This is rubbish. Lol you don't know how court work. They can nullify election don't you know? Elections has been redone don't you know? Or sometimes a court ruled who the winner is.

Nullify elections because of fraud yes, why not. Elections could be re done, yes surely.

The point is, none of this can happen because of a state law you didnt sue before election

If you were good with it before election, but all of a sudden because you lost you sue so it can overturn the election it wouldnt work ooo

Why have the election at all ?

benalvino2:


I personal don't think it will be easy to change the outcome of this but that does not mean there is no fraud. I have been saying this from the start. No one should just accept it without fighting.

For 3 years all you guys said was Russia stole the election.

Nothing was proven but courts took cases or listen to cases. Now this time they are saying lets look at the things so we can show you where everything is... And they said nope.

This sort of things happen in Nigeria all the time. Since everything is now political even the court... It means nothing can be done right

errors or fraud??

benalvino2:


I personal don't think it will be easy to change the outcome of this but that does not mean there is no fraud. I have been saying this from the start. No one should just accept it without fighting.

For 3 years all you guys said was Russia stole the election.

Nothing was proven but courts took cases or listen to cases. Now this time they are saying lets look at the things so we can show you where everything is... And they said nope.

This sort of things happen in Nigeria all the time. Since everything is now political even the court... It means nothing can be done right

Oh please! Nobody said Russia stole the election, don't twist things to fit your narrative.

If Trump could not prove his case before a Federalist judge then what else are we supposed to expect. Plus Sidney has been kicked off the team so her so called kraken is as effective as a wet soggy noodle.

benalvino2:

Without common sense you won't have sense.

Common sense is not the only sense one can have. We send you to school to go and upgrade your common sense to superior sense. If you don't study hard to acquire that more superior sense you will fail and reason like a dullard without sense.

LordReed:


Oh please! Nobody said Russia stole the election, don't twist things to fit your narrative.

If Trump could not prove his case before a Federalist judge then what else are we supposed to expect. Plus Sidney has been kicked off the team so her so called kraken is as effective as a wet soggy noodle.

Are you sure nobody said so? you just have to watch cnn

benalvino2:
The evidence is there already.

Not according to the judge you presented it to it isn't.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12726296_20201123041231569_jpeg_jpegf57371fdbe0a843d2996b07b2eca0b2f

But I guess the judge was not using "common sense" seeing as he obviously went to school to get some superior legal sense.

budaatum:

Common sense is not the only sense one can have. We send you to school to go and upgrade your common sense to superior sense. If you don't study hard to acquire that more superior sense you will fail and reason like a dullard without sense.

Hahaha hahaha
You don't study to acquire common sense. You use common sense to acquire knowledge.

Knowledge is awareness of facts or what could happen. Common sense is the ability to use knowledge with a view of achieving specific goals. A very knowledgeable person without common sense will mess up things and appears to be a fool. Whereas a person with little knowledge but lot of common sense will succeed in some situations.

Guy your philosophy is bad and you clearly don't understand what common sense is.

You upgrade your common sense to superior sense. Good lawd

benalvino2:


Are you sure nobody said so? you just have to watch cnn

Go ahead and find me a quote where it was said on CNN since you want to pivot to that. The charade is over so now you are free to start looking for some imaginary point. LMAO!

bayelsaowei:
errors or fraud??

Errors that always affect trump. Lol
There are frauds.

If congress does not feel compel that the election is free and fair all this court case and certification of result might not even matter.

benalvino2:
Oaths are taken by people with first hand knowledge and are willing to be punished if they are lying. I can see a man kill another man, but because I didn't have my phone to record it or prove it... All I have are my words.

What I am saying it's not every crime or fraud you can provide hard evidence for.

You word is not enough evidence to convict the man you claimed to see kill the other man you claim you saw him kill. The man you claim you saw kill another man can claim you are lying and that you killed the dead man and you would not expect us to take his word for it now would you?

Just as the man you saw's word is not proof you killed the dead man so is your word not evidence the man you claimed to see killed the dead man.

benalvino2:


Errors that always affect trump. Lol
There are frauds.

If congress does not feel compel that the election is free and fair all this court case and certification of result might not even matter.

can you in all fairness say minor election errors only affected trump and never affected biden?

Can you swear in a court?

LordReed:


LMFAO! Ah, I just wanted to give him benefit of the doubt that maybe he saw a lizard and mistook it for a kraken. Now I know it wasn't release the kraken but release the crackhead. LMFAO!

benalvino2:

You don't study to acquire common sense.

Obviously, you don't, which is why you think you have sense which you don't have. See you operating here with your "common sense" which is turning out to be complete nonsense of the ignorant type.

A little learning will reduce such ignorance and decrease your reliance on common sense. It's the reason your parents sacrificed to send you to school instead of have you rely on "common sense".

benalvino2:


Errors that always affect trump. Lol
There are frauds.

If congress does not feel compel that the election is free and fair all this court case and certification of result might not even matter.

Sidney Powell has her own legal funding website.She has been independent but coordinating with Trump legal team.She was banned from Twitter for posting this link.

https://gnews.org/577635/

LordReed:


Go ahead and find me a quote where it was said on CNN since you want to pivot to that. The charade is over so now you are free to start looking for some imaginary point. LMAO!

Maybe you have been under the rock

benalvino2:


If congress does not feel compel that the election is free and fair ......

You got any "evidence that "congress does not feel compel that the election is free and fair" or are you asking that we just take your common sense word for it?

benalvino2:


First you need to understand the difference between a hearsay and an oath.
Trump was impeached base on hearsay, people have gone to prison based on hearsay. There are people who robbed commit murder, and they brag about it in the pubs or prison... The court use hearsay in those aspect as an evidence. The hearsay has to fit with the evidence.

Oaths are taken by people with first hand knowledge and are willing to be punished if they are lying. I can see a man kill another man, but because I didn't have my phone to record it or prove it... All I have are my words.

What I am saying it's not every crime or fraud you can provide hard evidence for. This election has so many irregularities. If people are under aoth, people who work in the counting and canvassing process saying this and this happened under oath, why can't they rule that let's check for those things they say happen and see if it's there?

Why all the time wasting. Get investigators from both parties to check for those irregularities. The fake signatures etc. etc. Saying we recount or audit by same people who do the fraud is pointless. Thats just me.

these people under oath that you claim, have they been cross examined for bias? If yes, why are all these affidavits not standing up to scrutiny in the courts? People with first hand knowledge should be able to produce at the barest minimum pictorial or audio evidence in this digital age and not just mere word of mouth, at least the barest minimum of said evidence should have been unearthed in a manual recount in a Republican state like Georgia, so of what effing value has these purported affidavits been to the trump campaign so far?

basilico:


Sidney Powell has her own legal funding website.She has been independent but coordinating with Trump legal team.She was banned from Twitter for posting this link.

https://gnews.org/577635/

I don't trust that woman. We can wait and see but I don't believe lawyers should be talking too much. If they want to have a case they should start with something very simple and get to discovery. From discovery they can have access to so many things.

As it stands judges want to throw away cases.

benalvino2:


Maybe you have been under the rock

Are you blind? Do you see "Russia stole the election" in what you posted?

BraniacX:
these people under oath that you claim, have they been cross examined for bias? If yes, why are all these affidavits not standing up to scrutiny in the courts? People with first hand knowledge should be able to produce at the barest minimum pictorial or audio evidence in this digital age and not just mere word of mouth, at least the barest minimum of said evidence should have been unearthed in a manual recount in a Republican state like Georgia, so of what effing value has these purported affidavits been to the trump campaign so far?

You have to have a case first for cross examination to take place. How does the judges know they are lying? The whole system is just political which is bad. Judges act as activist these days instead of following the law.

Example, the obama judge in charge of Michael flynns case. The DOJ had brought proof that he was settle up and say they are dropping the case but the judge who is supposed to allow the case go refused. Now the judge has become the persecutor.

People with first hand knowledge are not required to produce video or audio to make their testimony valid. That's not how things work in the court.

LordReed:


Are you blind? Do you see "Russia stole the election" in what you posted?

Goal post has shifted. No one said Russia stole the election you said.

budaatum:

You got any "evidence that "congress does not feel compel that the election is free and fair" or are you asking that we just take your common sense word for it?

You see in Pennsylvania they refused to certify the election because not everyone feel things was right. Congress still have to accept those state who certified their elections or reject it after it is submitted. A lot of things are state. In the US the people don't elect the president. So all those who voted are not actually the ones who decide who becomes president.

Very complicated ND interesting

benalvino2:

As it stands judges want to throw away cases.

This is an example of your common sense. A person with superior sense would at least provide a reason for such a claim but you obviously lack both a reason and sense.

Judges don't "want to throw away cases". They would lack credibility if they do and would not advance far in their profession and would never have made judge in the first place.

Hear it said in Amy Coney Barrett's words:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12637531_20201106165428770_jpeg_jpeg410e12b3b251cc6063b2f1a50188e7ef

benalvino2:


You see in Pennsylvania they refused to certify the election because not everyone feel things was right. Congress still have to accept those state who certified their elections or reject it after it is submitted. A lot of things are state. In the US the people don't elect the president. So all those who voted are not actually the ones who decide who becomes president.

Very complicated ND interesting

It is obviously not true that "those who voted are not actually the ones who decide who becomes president"! Nor is it true that "Pennsylvania they refused to certify the election because not everyone feel things was right"!

Elections do not care about your feelings. We all vote and the person with the most votes wins. Its called Representative democracy, and has nothing to do with your "common sense" feelings.

budaatum:

This is an example of your common sense. A person with superior sense would at least provide a reason for such a claim but you obviously lack both a reason and sense.

Judges don't "want to throw away cases". They would lack credibility if they do and would not advance far in their profession and would never have made judge in the first place.

Hear it said in Amy Coney Barrett's words:

www.nairaland.com/attachments/12637531_20201106165428770_jpeg_jpeg410e12b3b251cc6063b2f1a50188e7ef

There is nothing like superior sense. Just stop talking about what you dont have

I don't even know why you are quoting Justice Amy like it helps you.

benalvino2:

I don't even know why you are quoting Justice Amy like it helps you.

Your common sense obviously does not let you understand how important intergrity is to a judge, as stated by Justice Amy. I bet you think she'll just vote trump because he put her there.

benalvino2:

Goal post has shifted. No one said Russia stole the election you said.

Wait, as i said earlier. Even before the election we all knew russia was playing an active role, intelligence reports already said as early as june 2016, that russia is interfering in the election

Did you see hillary litigate trump over the election results even tho it was razor thin

No she did not, she conceded. And the senate investigated russias interference, and we all saw yest they did contact the trump campaign

So whats your point ?

budaatum:

It is obviously not true that "those who voted are not actually the ones who decide who becomes president"! Nor is it true that "Pennsylvania they refused to certify the election because not everyone feel things was right"!

Elections do not care about your feelings. We all vote and the person with the most votes wins. Its called Representative democracy, and has nothing to do with your "common sense" feelings.

the people who vote only tells the electors who they want to be the president. The electors are actually the ones who vote for the president. So where one candidate win the entire states by voting even win by 1960 million votes to 0... The electors can still decide the guy with the 0 vote is the president. You understand?

budaatum:

Your common sense obviously does not let you understand how important intergrity is to a judge, as stated by Justice Amy. I bet you think she'll just vote trump because he put her there.

I am asking you because everyone was hating on her because trump appointed her. So I am asking you why are you quoting her? If she makes a decision that goes against you tomorrow will you say or quote what you just did again?

Even that she says does not mean it is practical. It is how a judge should behave but we know people sometimes don't follow their own rules

You are just wriggling like a worm that salt has been poured upon, twisting, turning and summersaulting without any forward movement

benalvino2:


I personal don't think it will be easy to change the outcome of this but that does not mean there is no fraud. I have been saying this from the start. No one should just accept it without fighting.

There is fraud because you think there is fraud? What kind of logic is that? Even Trump lawyers could not tell a judge that there was fraud.

For 3 years all you guys said was Russia stole the election.

No one ever said Russia stole the election, the allegation was that Russia interfered in the elections through misinformation campaigns and hacking the email of Hillary Clinton and key members of the Democratic party.

Nothing was proven but courts took cases or listen to cases. Now this time they are saying lets look at the things so we can show you where everything is... And they said nope.

Nothing was proven but many Trump associates and campaigns members were found guilty? Nothing was proven but many Russian companies and individuals were inducted?

This sort of things happen in Nigeria all the time. Since everything is now political even the court... It means nothing can be done right

So the courts is not political abi? FBI, CIA, justice department, the Press, The Republican party (RINOs), everyone except Trump is political.

Timiofak:


Wait, as i said earlier. Even before the election we all knew russia was playing an active role, intelligence reports already said as early as june 2016, that russia is interfering in the election

Did you see hillary litigate trump over the election results even tho it was razor thin

No she did not, she conceded. And the senate investigated russias interference, and we all saw yest they did contact the trump campaign

So whats your point ?

Lmao. They also said Russia was behind brexit, they said Russia wants to steal french election fearing macron will lose, same thing in Germany.

Hillary has been saying on tape that Russia stole the election and Trump is an illegitimate president. Not just her the media has been saying that. Hillary also said Biden should not concede no matter what.

benalvino2:


You have to have a case first for cross examination to take place. How does the judges know they are lying? The whole system is just political which is bad. Judges act as activist these days instead of following the law.

Example, the obama judge in charge of Michael flynns case. The DOJ had brought proof that he was settle up and say they are dropping the case but the judge who is supposed to allow the case go refused. Now the judge has become the persecutor.

People with first hand knowledge are not required to produce video or audio to make their testimony valid. That's not how things work in the court.

What are you talking about ? Mike flynn was set up ? Really

Just stop this your rubbish of kissing trumps ass

The obama administration already warned trump of mike flynn before anything. Trump still went ahead to appoint him

Pence later found out he lied too him. So who set him up

Mr man stop playing victim here