Can we agree that neither party trusts the voting system(s)?

[TSherbs]

Alternatively, a bipartisan group could examine evidence and present conclusions. The metaphorical exploration of the closet. Judicial rulings just have each side waving victory or crying foul. Consider the liberal criticism of the current Supreme Court.

Go for it. We already have the US House doing it, the 50 Secretaries of State doing it, various state courts doing it, the US press doing it (and all of them basically reaching the same conclusion). Even that private firm in Arizona did it (I can't remember it's name...that lengthy hand recount that had no effect). I'm not sure what an adhoc group outside of these other review streams might avail, but anyone is free to join the party. You can even form this group yourself, solicit docs via public records and FOI Act, and then publish your conclusions for review.

[dneal]

Alternatively, a bipartisan group could examine evidence and present conclusions. The metaphorical exploration of the closet. Judicial rulings just have each side waving victory or crying foul. Consider the liberal criticism of the current Supreme Court.

Go for it. We already have the US House doing it, the 50 Secretaries of State doing it, various state courts doing it, the US press doing it (and all of them basically reaching the same conclusion). Even that private firm in Arizona did it (I can't remember it's name...that lengthy hand recount that had no effect). I'm not sure what an adhoc group outside of these other review streams might avail, but anyone is free to join the party. You can even form this group yourself, solicit docs via public records and FOI Act, and then publish your conclusions for review.

“Go for it”? "Form this group yourself"?

We’re just chatting, right?

The Democrat speaker rejected the opposing party's selections for the Jan 6 committee, making claims of "bipartisan" farcical. Secretaries of State, Legislatures and Courts are pitted against each other, with (again) each side claiming partisan motive of the other. The private firm in AZ is lauded or libeled in the media, depending on view.

Let me be more pointed: consider your criticism of the current Supreme Court. Do you accept their rulings as bipartisan, or even non partisan?

[Chuck Naill]

She rejected Jordan and Banks. The testimonies collected were from Republicans involved. The two Republicans who did serve did so heroically, and as heroically as any American has.

Thomas is obviously partisan; Alito is a strange guy. I think the rest are embarrassed by them. We cannot choose our fellow employees.

Other judges have reminded us that voters, not judges, choose the president.

[TSherbs]

National Review criticism of the Cochise County stunt:
National Review: What Was the Point of That Cochise County Stunt?.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-county-stunt/

[TSherbs]

Alternatively, a bipartisan group could examine evidence and present conclusions. The metaphorical exploration of the closet. Judicial rulings just have each side waving victory or crying foul. Consider the liberal criticism of the current Supreme Court.

Go for it. We already have the US House doing it, the 50 Secretaries of State doing it, various state courts doing it, the US press doing it (and all of them basically reaching the same conclusion). Even that private firm in Arizona did it (I can't remember it's name...that lengthy hand recount that had no effect). I'm not sure what an adhoc group outside of these other review streams might avail, but anyone is free to join the party. You can even form this group yourself, solicit docs via public records and FOI Act, and then publish your conclusions for review.

“Go for it”? "Form this group yourself"?

We’re just chatting, right?

The Democrat speaker rejected the opposing party's selections for the Jan 6 committee, making claims of "bipartisan" farcical. Secretaries of State, Legislatures and Courts are pitted against each other, with (again) each side claiming partisan motive of the other. The private firm in AZ is lauded or libeled in the media, depending on view.

Let me be more pointed: consider your criticism of the current Supreme Court. Do you accept their rulings as bipartisan, or even non partisan?

?? I am just chatting.

Not sure what you would rather have me do. Another look at the issue is fine. I just don't think it would make any difference or draw a different conclusion.

And anyone can put something together and try.

[dneal]

I'm saying that comments along the lines of "go fix it yourself" appear spurious.

As to what I would "rather have you do", I suppose keeping to the theme about voter trust would be a start.

These types of posts:

The only thing missing so far is a prosecution of Donald Trump for his responsibility in the Jan 6 mess (other prosecutions of him may be coming, and his company is being tried for fraud as we speak).

So, there are some more trials on seditious conspiracy coming this month. These will be revealing also (not all charges have resulted in convictions).

...although they are clearly evidence for what happens when people do not trust the system, don't appear to me to be presented with that intent.

[Chuck Naill]

Trump does need to be held accountable just like me and you if we did the same.

[TSherbs]

I'm saying that comments along the lines of "go fix it yourself" appear spurious.

Good thing I wasn't saying that, then. I don't think that you or I can do a thing about distrust, except our own.

[Chuck Naill]

My recommendation is, vote!

[TSherbs]

My recommendation is, vote!

I did not volunteer in my town/district to help with the election this year, but I plan to do so for next year and again in 2024. This wild liberal might actually be allowed near some voting machines manufactured wh0-knows-where!! Or maybe I'll just be sweeping floors the next day....

[dneal]

I'm saying that comments along the lines of "go fix it yourself" appear spurious.

Good thing I wasn't saying that, then. I don't think that you or I can do a thing about distrust, except our own.

So what did “go for it” and “you can form this group yourself” mean, when the context was a bipartisan group examining evidence?

[TSherbs]

I'm saying that comments along the lines of "go fix it yourself" appear spurious.

Good thing I wasn't saying that, then. I don't think that you or I can do a thing about distrust, except our own.

So what did “go for it” and “you can form this group yourself” mean, when the context was a bipartisan group examining evidence?

whatever you want it to mean, I guess

I have already explained myself

[dneal]

You need to grow a coupe before thinking you can participate, 736z . Please don’t load you assault rifle. I’m not at the Walmart.

I'm saying that comments along the lines of "go fix it yourself" appear spurious.

Good thing I wasn't saying that, then. I don't think that you or I can do a thing about distrust, except our own.

So what did “go for it” and “you can form this group yourself” mean, when the context was a bipartisan group examining evidence?

whatever you want it to mean, I guess

I have already explained myself

I suppose that's one way to word it.

[TSherbs]

Kari Lake and the Arizona certification: some of the same language as Trump: throw out the result and give her the win or require a re-do:

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midt...eba9ac8df0da1b

[dneal]

Kari Lake and the Arizona certification: some of the same language as Trump: throw out the result and give her the win or require a re-do:

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midt...eba9ac8df0da1b

So more evidence of one of the sides not trusting the election system...

Hypothetically, suppose fraud were proven in one of these instances (Trump, Stacey Adams, Kari Lake, etc...), and the "losing" party actually won. What would the remedy be?

[TSherbs]

Another ruling rebuking a fraud suit as "specious" (in Michigan):

Detroit Free Press: Michigan Supreme Court rejects DePerno effort to revive Antrim County election case.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/pol...e/69714680007/

[dneal]

And the court's 4-3 D-R makeup continues to reinforce distrust.

I'm sure WashPost and the Brennan Center will be right on the partisan issue in Michigan.

[TSherbs]

What is it with Lake? I wonder if another judge will also slap this group with having cynically clogged the courts with a baseless suit and then make them pay all the costs.

The Arizona Republic: Kari Lake's lawsuit shows she's desperate and delusional.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opin...f/69719119007/

[TSherbs]

Maybe Lake wants to be Trump's running mate, and this is part of her audition??

[Chuck Naill]

Few think Trump will ever serve time, but they expect he'll lose his wealth. I would prefer he gets a Scrooge experience.