Search results

Most likely. We shall see with the investigation. Monitor what Left lawyer groups come to the defense of those that will be charged. It will be telling.

My post with screenshots was in response to Rlent who had already commented initially on the ruling and had already came to the conclusion that the Republican judges didn’t come to the right ruling. I made the assumption that since he did all that he actually had read the ruling and it’s reasons...

It’s illegal in Georgia. The ballots may be legal, but the process of harvesting them for one political party to skirt the law for an election advantage while the other side played by the rules is at issue here.

And it’s ILLEGAL. Busted

And this is related to whatever Trump might have said how?

Do you have a link on what he said considering you’ve taken on the role of whiny link hall monitor?

Dude, I can’t screenshot the entire opinion. That would be ridiculous. Just read the thing. It’s cut and dry. Precedent cases back up the decision. Voters decide the change in the constitution.

The screenshots were from the actual ruling by the court. So there is evidence.

Highly unlikely that there is a connection because of what Trump might have said.

Thanks for not clarifying.

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/this-is-huge-georgia-opens-investigation-into-ballot-harvesting-claims/

And that is based on what?

Oh. I thought you read it.

Chase and Lancaster City are the two court cases. Also, the method of voting was by paper ballot, until “other methods” like machines began to be used. So yes, the reference to ballots was paper ballots.

Whoopdedo. I think he will be fine without them. Check him out on Rumble. I also hear that Rumble is teaming up with Trump's Truth social so it should give him an even bigger audience. It's going to be big. :cheering-clapping-smiley-emoticon:

Not really. They’re making it harder to cheat. Also, the dissenting opinion by the Dem judges misinterpreted the constitution’s stipulation: “All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law.” The other method could not be a paper mail-in...

I was speaking specifically about the alternate electors issue. Not the Jan6 “investigation”. (The Dems stupidly forging ahead trying to put people in jail for years for having alternate electors ready in case the courts ruled in their favor. It’s just incredibly dumb to pursue this.) There are...

Oh I’m sure the Dems on the Pa. supreme will twist themselves into pretzels to rationalize their decision. It won’t be in following the Pa. Constitution on the matter though, because it is cut and dry: The people have to decide, not the legislature.