Pennsylvania judge halts election certification amid mail-in vote fight

Here's the link..

SNIP
“Those are all issues of state law, not ones that we can hear. And earlier lawsuits have rejected those claims. Seeking to turn those state-law claims into federal ones, the Campaign claims discrimination. But its alchemy cannot transmute lead into gold.”
ENDSNIP

https://www.yahoo.com/news/court-rejects-trump-pa-election-180520069.html

If Rudy didn't know opacity, my guess is his bulbous head is going to explode with alchemy...

Unless I miss my guess, this needs to be chalked up as another loss for the Trump campaign...

They are rapidly approaching the NY Jets for most futile record in 2020...

 

Tell that to the bozos at Fox News, now 7 figures lighter in the wallet over their Seth Rich nonsense......

 

Again, lots of words mixed with some speculation but no substance.

 

1.8 million ballots mailed out. 2.5 million came back in Pennsylvania. How is this possible?

 

Keep on reposting inaccurate info as if it was fact

3.1 million ballots were mailed out as was updated/documented daily every day up to the election

https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/PA.html

 

Got a LINK for that "claim"?

 

You are new here... imagine putting up with that nonsense for 3 years??

But it's getting even easier to debunk the nonsense than it was when I started PF.com...

They are told more ballots returned than mailed, so now it is carved in stone.

You are either posting fake news (to them) or they don't know how to interpret that simple chart...

 

Conspiracy theories only work when you don't need proof. I reposted yet again the count of 3m+ ballot sent out. A # I was looking up daily all through Oct/Nov. It did not magically change on 11/3

 

Thanks.

Why is it that Trump keeps Pushing FAKE Claim After Fake Claim?

Trump = Unhinged Idiot making up BS b/c he LOST.

 

I had been dealing with the same nonsense on other boards. I had been lurking here and I thought I would dip my feet into the pool

Lies >>>>Math, science, logic, facts

 

Yeah, I saw that.

But, it does beg the question:

Why would people continue to post fake claims (that can be so easily debunked)?

 

Because the cult has been brainwashed to believe that anything not communicated by their leader or OAN/Newsmax is fake (Fox News now also fake)

Hitler did the same things in the 1930s - great strategy for want to be dictators

 

I was thinking more about that Penn absentee ballot chart you posted. I think the bigger question than requested vs received is going to be requested vs NOT received. My rough math shows that at 460K, or 15%.

Obviously, not everybody is going to return their requested ballot, but that seems like a pretty high pct in a powder keg election.

I know there are some in Pa that were postmarked on time that were received late that Pa is waiting for the word to count or discard.

After Joe takes office, among the millions of things he needs to do "first" has got to be to figure out just how bad DeJoy and Trump ****ed up the USPS for this election and get that fixed in time for 2022.

I predict the intentional USPS slowdown will turn out to be one of the biggest factors in whatever bad happened in this election, and much of that will return anecdotal evidence that Biden should have won even larger than he did.

 

Actually, it's a very small amount of words summarizing the actual arguments made by Boockvar, Wolf et al - all very substantive if you care to read the court filings in full. Though if you think this is a lot of words, I'm guessing you don't.

 

https://twitter.com/AMPFEST_USA/status/1332405117136592896

Video:
https://twitter.com/drewallendudley/status/1332417135243448321

 

No, the one that just got thrown out was the one the judge described as "Frankenstein's monster", which is the one where they made the complaint, then amended the complaint, then wanted to amend it again. Also featuring a revolving door of lawyers. Interestingly, the appeals judge referred to lots of their other failed cases as he dismissed this one, piece by piece - that is, their failed cases are now being used as precedent against them. LOL

This new one is the same crazy zone. For instance, as a remedy to their alleged "injuries" they want to throw out ALL the results, which means the PA General Assembly will be defunct and inoperable. They then want that same Assembly, which they've just rendered defunct, to select the electors, which it can't do, because it's defunct. Not only that, this 'remedy' means one of the plaintiffs - Mike Kelly - will be canceling his own election to Congress... I'm not sure if these lawyers are being paid way too much, or far too little.

 

Lawyers are smart- getting paid for nonsense suits paid for by the gullible cultists

 

The Presidential election has already been certified. I don't know where you're going with this.

 

No such thing happened. Who told you it did, and why did you believe them?

 

Except, it WON'T happen, and even if it did it would be a Dead End.

Whoever put that on Twitter has no idea how the Elector selection process works.

 

The quality is lacking. You still don't present any argument other than "is not". I have read the motion from the plaintiff and they have a good argument that the state has to pass an amendment to change something that their constitution states. They can't be in conflict. The state constitution trumps Act 77. There has been another judge that has issued an order to stop certification based on the same argument.

From the new ruling from the Commonwealth court of PA.:

"In the Petition, Petitioners allege that the Act of October 31, 2019, P.L. 552, No. 77 (Act
77), which added and amended various absentee and mail-in voting provisions in the
Pennsylvania Election Code (Election Code),1 is unconstitutional and void ab initio
because it purportedly contravenes the requirements of the Pennsylvania
Constitution. Petitioners allege that Article VII, section 14 of the Pennsylvania
Constitution provides two exclusive mechanisms by which a qualified elector may
cast his or her vote in an election: (1) by submitting his or her vote in propria persona
at the polling place on election day; and (2) by submitting an absentee ballot, but
only if the qualified voter satisfies the conditions precedent to meet the requirements
of one of the four, limited exclusive circumstances under which absentee voting is
authorized under the Pennsylvania constitution. (Petition, ¶16.) Petitioners allege
that mail-in voting in the form implemented through Act 77 is an attempt by the
legislature to fundamentally overhaul the Pennsylvania voting system and permit
universal, no-excuse, mail-in voting absent any constitutional authority. Id., ¶17.
Petitioners argue that in order to amend the Constitution, mandatory procedural
requirements must be strictly followed. Specifically, pursuant to Article XI, Section
1, a proposed constitutional amendment must be approved by a majority vote of the
members of both the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Senate in two
consecutive legislative sessions, then the proposed amendment must be published
for three months ahead of the next general election in two newspapers in each
county, and finally it must be submitted to the qualified electors as a ballot question
in the next general election and approved by a majority of those voting on the
amendment. According to Petitioners, the legislature did not follow the necessary
procedures for amending the Constitution before enacting Act 77 which created a
new category of mail-in voting; therefore, the mail-in ballot scheme under Act 77 is
unconstitutional on its face and must be struck down. Id., ¶¶27, 35-37."


"Const. Article VII Section 14 as the plain language of that constitutional provision
is at odds with the mail-in provisions of Act 77. Since this presents an issue of law
which has already been thoroughly briefed by the parties, this Court can state that
Petitioners have a likelihood of success on the merits of its Pennsylvania
Constitutional claim."

There is also a valid question at to whether the votes were properly certified and is addressed by this judge. It seems that the just certified the results for the presidential election and not the other elections. The plaintiff and the judge question whether the ballots can be certified piecemeal or if the law states that all ballots are to be certified at the same time.

More from the judge's order:

"Petitioners’ Supplemental Application for Emergency Relief also raise the issue of whether the
results of an election can be certified piecemeal. It is also noted Petitioners alleged
that notwithstanding Respondents’ Press Release, the dispute was not moot because
the certification process for the presidential and vice presidential elections had not
been perfected because there were additional steps that need to be completed,
including: issuance of commissions to persons elected, pursuant to 25 P.S. § 3160;
issuance of certificates election, and transmission of such certificates to the Speaker
of the House of Representatives of the United States, in the case of the election of
representatives in Congress, pursuant to 25 P.S. § 3163; issuance of certificates of
election to the persons elected members of the Senate and House of Representatives
of the Commonwealth, and presentation of the several returns of the same elections
before the senate and House of Representatives pursuant to 25 P.S. § 3164; delivery
of the returns of elections for Auditor General and State Treasurer to the President
of the Senate, so that they be “declared elected thereto,” the making and filing of
certificates for all such elections, the issuance of commissions for all such elections,
and the issuance of commissions for each election of Judge of every court, pursuant
to 25 P.S. § 3165; issuance of certificates of election to successful candidates of
elections pursuant to 25 P.S. § 2621; delivery of certificates of election for each
presidential and vice presidential elector pursuant to 25 P.S. § 3166 (Petitioners’
Supplemental Application for Emergency Relief at 4.)"

https://www.marklevinshow.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/301/2020/11/Memorandum-Opinion-Filed.pdf


Pa. Judge Halts Election Certification For Mail-In Vote Fight
https://www.law360.com/articles/1332475/pa-judge-halts-election-certification-for-mail-in-vote-fight

 

This is not a ruling on the case. It's an opinion explaining her ruling on emergency relief (the injunction) which necessitates detailing the claims and arguments in play, hence the detailed summaries of the petitioner's claim - their words, not hers.

Why explain? Because it's gone to appeal, and she has to justify her decision to grant an injunction - that is, explain how each of the necessary prongs were met (as, for example, weighing likely harms to petitioner and respondent if granted/not granted). One of these prongs is the likelihood of success of the merits, which she feels is met.

However, this statement is context of granting the injunction and is by no means a ruling on the case - it hasn't been litigated. There hasn't even been an evidentiary hearing, so the all facts are not yet in play.

As she states, the injunction was granted "pending an evidentiary hearing to ascertain the facts of this matter and to determine if the dispute is moot"...

"Since the Court is sitting in equity it has the power to fashion such relief as it is vitally important that the status quo be preserved pending further judicial scrutiny. Com. ex rel. Corbett v. Snyder, 977 A.2d 28, 43 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009). (“[t]he purpose of preliminary injunctive relief is to maintain the status quo until the case can be investigated and adjudicated.”)..."

"For all of the above reasons, the Court respectfully submits that the emergency preliminary injunction was properly issued and should be upheld pending an expedited emergency evidentiary hearing."
----

NEXT LESSON: acquaint yourself with the respondent arguments as to why mail-in ballots per Act 77 are constitutional. Specifically, how the PA Constitution states that elections can be conducted "by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law".

 

It's the Beijing Biden supporters getting unhinged over the challenges, it means the end of the Democrat party if proven true.

 

Meanwhile, in the harsh land of reality, the Pennsylvania Supreme court just ruled.

http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-7862/file-10781.pdf?cb=1f7217
---
and DISMISS WITH PREJUDICE the petition
---

The court pretty much called the Trump team big ol' cheats and liars for waiting until after losing the election to challenge election law.

---
The want of due diligence demonstrated in this matter is unmistakable. Petitioners filed this facial challenge to the mail-in voting statutory provisions more than one year after the enactment of Act 77. At the time this action was filed on November 21, 2020, millions of Pennsylvania voters had already expressed their will in both the June 2020 Primary Election and the November 2020 General Election and the final ballots in the 2020 General Election were being tallied, with the results becoming seemingly apparent. Nevertheless, Petitioners waited to commence this litigation until days before the county boards of election were required to certify the election results to the Secretary of the Commonwealth.Thus, it is beyond cavil that Petitioners failed to act with due diligence in presenting the instant claim. Equally clear is the substantial prejudice arising from Petitioners’ failure to institute promptly a facial challenge to the mail-in voting statutory scheme, as such inaction would result in the disenfranchisement of millions of Pennsylvania voters.

Accordingly, we grant the application for extraordinary jurisdiction, vacate the Commonwealth Court’s order preliminarily enjoining the Commonwealth from taking any further action regarding the certification of the results of the 2020 General Election, and dismiss with prejudice Petitioners’ petition for review. All other outstanding motions are dismissed as moot.
---

Trumpflakes, please proceed with your conspiracy theories about how evil liberal judges are plotting against you, and then add some wishful thinking about how the US Supreme Court will somehow save your fascist coup.