Appeals court rejects Trump
challenge of Pennsylvania race
Associated Press,
by
Maryclaire Dale
Original Article
Posted By: ragu,
11/27/2020 6:33:35 PM
PHILADELPHIA
President Donald Trump’s legal team suffered yet another defeat in court Friday as a federal appeals court in Philadelphia roundly rejected the campaign's latest effort to challenge the state’s election results.
Trump’s lawyers vowed to appeal to the Supreme Court despite the judges' assessment that the “campaign’s claims have no merit.”
“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here,” 3rd Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas, a Trump appointee, wrote for the three-judge panel
Reply 1 - Posted by:
ragu 11/27/2020 6:36:15 PM (No. 618085)
Please remove/ignore this post. Similar article is posted below, but with different source, etc.
3 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
DVC 11/27/2020 6:49:06 PM (No. 618089)
AssPress is despicable.
14 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Daisymay 11/27/2020 7:12:26 PM (No. 618101)
If PA couldn`t see the Fraud staring them the face, I don't know what it will take to save our country from Biden! God Save Us!
10 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
SALady 11/27/2020 7:22:13 PM (No. 618109)
Any judge who would say “Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy" needs to be disbarred immediately!!!!
We do not have a democracy in this country. We have a republic!!! And if a judge doesn't understand the difference, and why fair elections are so important to that republic, he has no business being a judge!!!!!
25 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
swarfer 11/27/2020 7:30:50 PM (No. 618114)
Unfairness is the very definition of discrimination. Voters who expect impartial elections are discriminated against when they are not. The courts have a long history or redressing discrimination. Unfortunately few if any have the moral stamina to get involved in a controversial presidential election which exposes embedded Democratic party corruption. It was always going to be up the SOTUS to sort out election fraud.
3 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
athina 11/27/2020 7:36:35 PM (No. 618115)
I don’t understand the strategy either. I am reading many many articles describing all kinds of fraud in PA — but they are not alleging fraud here. I just am not following, and it’s disheartening.
4 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
RedWhite&Blue2 11/27/2020 7:39:13 PM (No. 618116)
Ask Jill Stein about her struggle for justice..
It took FOUR years for vote fraud justice for her..same vote fraud they did to her!
Four years to get it right!
We don’t have four years..
Praying for God to enlighten these hypocrites
I have nasty words for these “judges”
6 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
davew 11/27/2020 10:15:33 PM (No. 618187)
Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here,
I guess the judge forgot to read the several dozen affidavits that provided detailed evidence of specific acts of fraud and violation of the many poll watching laws that were testified to by eye witnesses. Hopefully the SCOTUS will not forget their glasses and evaluate the written testimony with a more discerning and less biased eye.
3 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
davew 11/27/2020 10:21:46 PM (No. 618192)
The way you know this is a political judgement is the fact that under law the judge is supposed to assume the testimony is true and accurate and determine if their is any reason under law (standing, moot assertions, conflicts with other cases) that would prevent going to a full evidentiary hearing where the defendants would challenge the evidence. The fact that they just punted indicates they don't want to get their hands burned by a hot potato that might cost them their seat on the bench.
6 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
DCGIRL 11/28/2020 4:18:52 AM (No. 618287)
The Appeals court in the PA district is made up of Obama, Bush and Clinton judges. What did you expect.
0 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
ROLFNader 11/28/2020 7:16:05 AM (No. 618325)
I'll wait for the Fat Lady ....
1 person likes this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Strike3 11/28/2020 10:25:36 AM (No. 618481)
They say that justice is blind but Stephanos is taking that seriously. Pennsylvania was pro-Trump by 12 percentage points on the evening of November 3rd before the dem fraud machine kicked in.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "ragu"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
Why didn't Rudy Giuliani provide proof? Can't blame this ruling on Democrats, all three judges were appointed by Republicans, one being appointed by President Trump. Will the US Supreme Court rule the same way?