Wisconsin V**ers File Suite: Has anyone else seen this? The civil action, https://www.wpr.org/sites/default/files/1_1.pdf filed on Thursday, alleges that there is “sufficient evidence...

Simple Sam Loc: USA

Has anyone else seen this?

The civil action, https://www.wpr.org/sites/default/files/1_1.pdf filed on Thursday, alleges that there is “sufficient evidence that illegal v**es were counted” in Milwaukee, Dane, and Menominee counties “to change or place in doubt the results” of the p**********l e******n in the counties. The v**ers asked the court to declare that the counties’ results “must be invalidated” and to block the counties from certifying their results.

All three counties lean heavily Democrat, with Milwaukee and Dane being among the most populous and heavily Democratic counties in the state. For the three counties, Biden holds a lead of 365,289 v**es over Trump. In the state overall, Biden holds a lead of about 20,540 v**es at 49.6 percent, compared to Trump at 48.9 percent as of Saturday. The Trump campaign has signaled it will request a recount. The action, if successful, would invalidate over 792,000 v**es cast across the state.

Lonewolf

Simple Sam wrote:

Has anyone else seen this? br br The civil action... (show quote)

Not going to happen these cases all go to hell when the judge asks for eveidenc if Biden lost win he still president elect

woodguru

Simple Sam wrote:

Has anyone else seen this? br br The civil action... (show quote)

If their proof is the anecdotal type courts have seen so far they are pissing in the wind, you don't invalidate a whole e******n's count over a few bad b****ts.

roy

Simple Sam wrote:

Has anyone else seen this? br br The civil action... (show quote)

Just saw one of trumps faud v**ers you know one of those dead v**ers giving an interview in georiga.trump should be ashamed to accuse a little old lady of v***r f***d. Somehow seems she's needs a lawyer.

Simple Sam Loc: USA

Lonewolf wrote:

Not going to happen these cases all go to hell when the judge asks for eveidenc

Some do, some don't. I think the judges tossing suits may be in error. Only in murder trials is the rule of beyond reasonable doubt required. In v**er discriminations the law requires a reasonable doubt; was the legal v**er provided accommodations and proper weight to their v**e (every v**e counts equally, guaranteed under the Constitution).

Judges are setting a standard for today and the future. One day a Democrat will be put in the exact position as Republicans are now. Ask yourself, how will they feel being disenfranchised? I believe that ALL v**ers have a RIGHT to know e******ns are conducted fairly. Don't you?

Simple Sam Loc: USA

roy wrote:

Just saw one of trumps faud v**ers you know one of those dead v**ers giving an interview in georiga.trump should be ashamed to accuse a little old lady of v***r f***d. Somehow seems she's needs a lawyer.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but old folks can be just as dishonest as anyone else!

Simple Sam Loc: USA

woodguru wrote:

If their proof is the anecdotal type courts have seen so far they are pissing in the wind, you don't invalidate a whole e******n's count over a few bad b****ts.

How many is a "few?"

roy

Simple Sam wrote:

Sorry to bust your bubble, but old folks can be just as dishonest as anyone else!

So you v**e and your accused of being dead and v***r f***d, that's Trump and his lawyers fault. They may have ruined this lady's reputation, a lawyer is in order dont you think.

Simple Sam Loc: USA

roy wrote:

So you v**e and your accused of being dead and v***r f***d, that's Trump and his lawyers fault. They may have ruined this lady's reputation, a lawyer is in order dont you think.

Because YOU did not give a link to your "story" it is impossible to judge the validity of what you posted.

You may be referring to; "A Georgia v**er in her mid-90s caused confusion when she used her husband’s name to participate in the Nov. 3 e******n. Now, she’s stepped up to confirm she cast the b****t that some e******n f***d seekers portrayed as a “dead v**er.”

If so, she committed fraud.

JoyV

roy wrote:

So you v**e and your accused of being dead and v***r f***d, that's Trump and his lawyers fault. They may have ruined this lady's reputation, a lawyer is in order dont you think.

If you are referring to the elderly woman who cast a b****t for her deceased husband, then yes that IS v***r f***d. Her age has nothing to do with it. Whether she knows how her husband would have v**ed is not the issue either. That he was deceased and she illegally cast a v**e in his name, IS the issue.

Michael10

Simple Sam wrote:

Some do, some don't. I think the judges tossing s... (show quote)

IN any case where you accuse someone else of any type wrong doing, you must have "evidence" or "proof" of said wrongdoing or you don't have a case. There is no proof of wrongdoing in this e******n. All the state e******n officials Republican and Democrat says there is no fraud.
Things aren't necessarily true just because Trump says they are, actually just the opposite is true.

Michael10

JoyV wrote:

If you are referring to the elderly woman who cast a b****t for her deceased husband, then yes that IS v***r f***d. Her age has nothing to do with it. Whether she knows how her husband would have v**ed is not the issue either. That he was deceased and she illegally cast a v**e in his name, IS the issue.

She uses his name with a MRS. in front of it, Example Mrs. Joe Smith and that's how she cast her v**e. Tucker Carlson has already had to eat crow about this one.

https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=tucker+carlson+apologizes+to+dead+women&fr=yfp-t-s&ei=UTF-8&fp=1

Simple Sam Loc: USA

Michael10 wrote:

IN any case where you accuse someone else of any type wrong doing, you must have "evidence" or "proof" of said wrongdoing or you don't have a case. There is no proof of wrongdoing in this e******n. All the state e******n officials Republican and Democrat says there is no fraud.
Things aren't necessarily true just because Trump says they are, actually just the opposite is true.

Actus reus is not always or usually required in law. Example, 10 people saw a murder, they leave the scene to report it. Meantime the body is removed. The court does not require a corpse to demand an investigation. You are employed and your boss attempts to rape you. No physical proof is required to have an investigation. Your home is vandalized, you do not need to catch the person on video to have it investigated. Most of the time, a crowd of people making a similar claim is sufficient for an investigation. There are thousands of examples.

The important thing to remember, when you strip another person's implied or given rights, you also strip yourself f those same rights.

Simple Sam Loc: USA

Michael10 wrote:

She uses his name with a MRS. in front of it, Example Mrs. Joe Smith and that's how she cast her v**e. Tucker Carlson has already had to eat crow about this one.

https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=tucker+carlson+apologizes+to+dead+women&fr=yfp-t-s&ei=UTF-8&fp=1

Immaterial, she registered and v**ed as James E, Blalock her dead husband. At 96 and quote Keefe "charming and sharp" she should know her own name. I am sure when asked her name she does not reply "James."

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Simple Sam wrote:

Has anyone else seen this? br br The civil action... (show quote)

Allegations are not evidence.......................if it were, trump would have been removed from office the day he was sworn in.