Valkyrie Riders Cruiser Club
July 05, 2025, 12:32:14 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Ultimate Seats Link VRCC Store
Homepage : Photostash : JustPics : Shoptalk : Old Tech Archive : Classifieds : Contact Staff
News: If you're new to this message board, read THIS!
 
MarkT Exhaust
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Pennsylvania  (Read 2656 times)
scooperhsd
Member
*****
Posts: 5716

Kansas City KS


« Reply #40 on: November 27, 2020, 05:15:12 PM »

I believe IF (and that's a BIG IF) there had been enough evidence put forth by the Democratically run House, said amendments probably would have met approval (even in a Republican Senate). However, everybody and his brother knew the Democrats were just throwing what ever they could think of just to see if it would stick - none of it did. The impeachment hearing was a big, fat, nothing - just the Democrats shooting off their mouths trying to overturn the 2016 election by whatever means they could.
Logged
Leathel
Member
*****
Posts: 877


New Zealand


« Reply #41 on: November 27, 2020, 07:49:11 PM »

I watched some of this guys videos, interesting over the last few weeks and seams factual




https://youtu.be/vNi9ztjcjwY



 "republicans did well....except trump"?

https://youtu.be/1HWb5Qc_Rvk
« Last Edit: November 27, 2020, 07:55:39 PM by Leathel » Logged
Bighead
Member
*****
Posts: 8654


Madison Alabama


« Reply #42 on: November 27, 2020, 07:52:04 PM »

I watched some of this guys videos, interesting over the last few weeks and seams factual




https://youtu.be/vNi9ztjcjwY
On to the supreme court.
Logged

1997 Bumble Bee
1999 Interstate (sold)
2016 Wing
Leathel
Member
*****
Posts: 877


New Zealand


« Reply #43 on: November 27, 2020, 10:33:24 PM »

I watched some of this guys videos, interesting over the last few weeks and seams factual




https://youtu.be/vNi9ztjcjwY
On to the supreme court.

Unless they have new evidence ........... they wont take it, especially if it won't change the results


 These court cases almost look like a means of drawing in more funds through donations etc
Logged
baldo
Member
*****
Posts: 6960


Youbetcha

Cape Cod, MA


« Reply #44 on: November 27, 2020, 11:29:03 PM »

I watched some of this guys videos, interesting over the last few weeks and seams factual




https://youtu.be/vNi9ztjcjwY
On to the supreme court.

Unless they have new evidence ........... they wont take it, especially if it won't change the results


 These court cases almost look like a means of drawing in more funds through donations etc

Exactly.
Logged

baldo
Member
*****
Posts: 6960


Youbetcha

Cape Cod, MA


« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2020, 09:26:06 PM »

This is like Groundhog Day....

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/28/politics/pennsylvania-state-supreme-court-election-case/index.html
Logged

98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13477


South Jersey


« Reply #46 on: November 29, 2020, 05:27:14 AM »


The Pennsylvania Supreme Court consists of seven members. Five are Democrats and two are Republicans.

Here's a brief rundown of who they are, where they're from and when they joined the court:

• Chief Justice Thomas G. Saylor, 73, a Republican from Harrisburg, joined the court in 1998.   According to Common Pleas Judge Barry Feudale, Saylor complained to him that African American former Supreme Court Justice Cynthia Baldwin had "caused us a lot of trouble when she was on the Supreme Court because of her minority agenda.”    So he is going for the democrats to keep his job until he can retire. even though he is past mandatory retirement age of 70.

• Justice Max Baer, 72, a Democrat from Allegheny County, joined the court in 2004.

• Justice Debra McCloskey Todd, 60, a Democrat from Butler County, joined the court in 2008.

• Justice Christine Donohue, 65, a Democrat from Allegheny County, joined the court in 2016.

• Justice Kevin M. Dougherty, 55, a Democrat from Philadelphia, joined the court in 2016.

• Justice David Wecht, 55, a Democrat from Allegheny County, joined the court in 2016.

• Justice Sallie Updyke Mundy, 55, a Republican from Tioga County, joined the court in 2016.
Mundy was appointed by democrat Governor Tom Wolf  so she is a RINO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Pennsylvania
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
Jersey mike
Member
*****
Posts: 10382

Brick,NJ


« Reply #47 on: November 29, 2020, 06:45:57 AM »





https://www.theblaze.com/news/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-down-absentee-ballot-challenge

“ Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment. Petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. 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.”




“Meanwhile, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor and Justice Sallie Mundy filed a concurring and dissenting opinion suggesting that the constitutional merits of the case — that Act 77 may violate the state constitution — could be considered by a lower court at a different time. They agreed, though, that the current petitioners acted far too late.”


http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-7862/file-10783.pdf?cb=885cb7


Logged
98valk
Member
*****
Posts: 13477


South Jersey


« Reply #48 on: November 29, 2020, 07:14:34 AM »





https://www.theblaze.com/news/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-down-absentee-ballot-challenge

“ Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment. Petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. 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.”




“Meanwhile, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor and Justice Sallie Mundy filed a concurring and dissenting opinion suggesting that the constitutional merits of the case — that Act 77 may violate the state constitution — could be considered by a lower court at a different time. They agreed, though, that the current petitioners acted far too late.”


http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-7862/file-10783.pdf?cb=885cb7





what is crazy is those judges said they should of file a yr ago. Really!?  the election just happened.


“When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt, but protects the corrupt from you – you know your nation is doomed.”

― Ayn Rand
Logged

1998 Std/Tourer, 2007 DR200SE, 1981 CB900C  10speed
1973 Duster 340 4-speed rare A/C, 2001 F250 4x4 7.3L, 6sp

"Our Constitution was made only for a Moral and Religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the goverment of any other."
John Adams 10/11/1798
scooperhsd
Member
*****
Posts: 5716

Kansas City KS


« Reply #49 on: November 29, 2020, 10:42:26 AM »





https://www.theblaze.com/news/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-down-absentee-ballot-challenge

“ Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment. Petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. 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.”




“Meanwhile, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor and Justice Sallie Mundy filed a concurring and dissenting opinion suggesting that the constitutional merits of the case — that Act 77 may violate the state constitution — could be considered by a lower court at a different time. They agreed, though, that the current petitioners acted far too late.”


http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-7862/file-10783.pdf?cb=885cb7





what is crazy is those judges said they should of file a yr ago. Really!?  the election just happened.


“When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt, but protects the corrupt from you – you know your nation is doomed.”

― Ayn Rand


I don't think it could have been stated any better -
 "what is crazy is those judges said they should of file a yr ago. Really!?  the election just happened. "
Logged
baldo
Member
*****
Posts: 6960


Youbetcha

Cape Cod, MA


« Reply #50 on: December 08, 2020, 02:17:56 PM »

Is it 0-50 or 1-49 in legal case scoring?

They won the 6 foot vs 10 foot lawsuit, I think.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/08/politics/supreme-court-pennsylvania-trump-biden/index.html
Logged

Bret SD
Member
*****
Posts: 4306


***

San Diego, Ca.


« Reply #51 on: December 08, 2020, 03:02:17 PM »





https://www.theblaze.com/news/pennsylvania-supreme-court-strikes-down-absentee-ballot-challenge

“ Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because Petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment. Petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene Pa. 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.”




“Meanwhile, Chief Justice Thomas Saylor and Justice Sallie Mundy filed a concurring and dissenting opinion suggesting that the constitutional merits of the case — that Act 77 may violate the state constitution — could be considered by a lower court at a different time. They agreed, though, that the current petitioners acted far too late.”


http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/setting-7862/file-10783.pdf?cb=885cb7





what is crazy is those judges said they should of file a yr ago. Really!?  the election just happened.


“When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt, but protects the corrupt from you – you know your nation is doomed.”

― Ayn Rand


I don't think it could have been stated any better -
 "what is crazy is those judges said they should of file a yr ago. Really!?  the election just happened. "

If they had filed a year ago it would have been tossed for lack of the ability to prove  'damages'.. it's all part of the setup. Corrupt judges, backroom deals.. the hits just keep on coming.

Trump's been way ahead of dems and media from day one..  and still they underestimate what's going to happen to them before this is all over.
Logged

Bret

02 Standard -- Blue & White
82 Aspencade -- Red
“No man has the right to be an amateur in the matter of physical training. It is a shame for a man to grow old without seeing the beauty and strength of which his body is capable.” Socrates
carolinarider09
Member
*****
Posts: 12438


Newberry, SC


« Reply #52 on: December 08, 2020, 03:03:43 PM »

 cooldude

What he said.
Logged

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: