European countries banning electronic voting machines was news to me.

The background of the lawyers and their involvement in 2008 & 2012 investigations into this matter was also eye opening...

From his basement?

It's tinfoil hat trash.

it hasn't changed over the years -- regardless of what had become known about them.

The population of Black Americans in Maryland is 30.3%,
and of DC is 49%

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/24

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/11

It is done gone.

RICO is a federal law, and civil suits can only be brought against defendants found guilty in federal court of racketeering. Usually organized crime.

The people you're pushing here, pdsimdars, are trying to make fools of the public. They know the word "racketeering" has negative connotations, mainly of "the mob," and so they tossed it in.

I'd bet my next paycheck this will prove to be yet another phony suit brought just to get publicity and deceive the public into believing lies. Like all the others so far, including all those brought or threatened so far by Bernie himself.

I'm certain that Mr Fritakis, Mr Arnebeck, and others have a pretty damned good handle on how and what to do and your understanding is imperfect.

I'm pretty sure, but not certain, that RICO prosecution can start via a lawsuit, which is part of the purpose of the law allowing citizens with standing to originate prosecution under the RICO law.

SO how much are prepared to wager?

dishonest political operators, and I know that by their silly use of the term. A civil lawsuit could NEVER be "racketeering." That's federal criminal law, and a really major one too. They are making fools of everyone who believes this obvious nonsense.

As for the very idea of a RICO prosecution of a political party or presidential candidate??!!! Come on. Shouldn't that least clue one in? Just the suspicion of such a thing would push everything else off cable and broadcast news 24/7. Even Trump promising to nuke the ayrabs in France would only get brief mention.

Got it?

How's she doing these days, I wonder...

I don't even want to go look.

The civil suits are completely independent of any prosecution.

Some Hillary supporters want her so bad they make stuff up. That is how an echo chamber starts, which I believe will happen once we are not participating, whether by choice or kicked out like they did with the Hillary Clinton group.

And the people's business will be pushed aside AGAIN.

On what grounds, pray tell?

You realize that a POTUS can only be impeached based on crimes committed while in office. So please enlighten all of us as to what crime Hillary will be committing the day she is sworn-in that will lead to impeachment proceedings.

That's all the justification they think they need to begin. Hell, GOP was plotting obstruction of Obama even before he was sworn in.

... are going to start impeachment proceedings on the day HRC is sworn-in - and they are going to do that based on no grounds whatsoever.

If there's anyone Republicans hate more than Obama it's a Clinton. And they'll be eager to divert attention from their loss with Trump, and throwing some red meat to their base to get them fired up again.

What criminal act will Hillary be accused of on her first day in office?

In case you don't know - and I have a feeling you don't - grounds for impeachment do not include "we hate her".

I answered above. They don't need a legitimate reason, they're Republicans out for blood.. Capece?

And you're still dodging the question - so perhaps it's you who has a problem with comprehension.

Saying "they don't need a legitimate reason" is demonstrative of being either ridiculously stupid, or appallingly ignorant of how the procedure works.

The Republicans cannot launch impeachment proceedings on the basis of "we don't need a legitimate reason - we just want to do this."

Seriously, dude - are you THAT unaware of how things work?

The "impeachment" fantasy comes straight out of the same CDS as the indictment fairy.

It will be fun seeing this lawsuit dismissed

but if they are successful, it will turn into a joke. We need to support the nominee, not tear her down with facts.

The earlier california case was in effect laughed out of court. The conspiracy theory based case will suffer a similar fate

No standing will be one reason. This organization was not harmed, so no standing.

Wrong jurisdiction will probably be another. I don't know where this has been filed, but I'm betting their complaints are out of that court's jurisdiction.

Exit polling is variable and prone to errors. The science is unclear, so such evidence wouldn't be valid. Dismissed for failure to demonstrate any likelihood of success in the suit.

We have a Federal agency, the FEC, which is responsible for compliance with election laws. They report to the Justice Department, which is the organization to file suits on this in federal court.

There will be no trial of this suit.

authority to select our candidates will not, and cannot, be challenged. It can be obvious as it certainly was during this primary, but it makes no difference because the forces perpetrating the fraud are the same forces that control the MSM messaging to the public.

Trust Vote has been allying about filing this lawsuit for weeks and keep finding excuses not to file.

Prediction. If and when this suit is filed it will take a court less time to dismiss it than it took to prepare it.

Unless a Smoking Gun whistleblower has recorded the elected...participating.

In this particular case, I agree with counsels.

Hillary is just a pawn, in the puppetmasters game

And as already mentioned there's no such thing as a "racketeering lawsuit."



Also this exit poll bullshit has been comprehensively debunked.
http://www.thenation.com/article/reminder-exit-poll-conspiracy-theories-are-totally-baseless/

And no the US government does not use exit poll differences to determine the legitimacy of foreign elections. That's not remotely what exit polls are for. Exit polls are used to assess the demographic breakdown of the voting, not to verify the results of the actual vote counts.

This completely disrespects the millions that voted for Clinton. This is sore loserdom at its worst.

Can you provide a link to a news article that discusses Sanders' legal team filing suit against any state's primary result?

and to my knowledge, that was the only time Bernie Sanders actually used the term "fraud" to describe what happened. He didn't file a lawsuit, however, and I don't have a link handy for this, but I found articles with some of the details in the Spanish language press.

Thank you kindly.

And this type of idiocy keeps popping up as if they had any merit.

Fwiw, not shaking in my boots.

He can tell us all about election theft. Ha ha ha.

Although I'm sure the GOP is learning things from the Clinton campaign. The Foundation is a pretty novel money laundering operation to avoid campaign finance laws.

Thanks for the thread, pdsimdars.

...I mean, if HE doesn't think there was election fraud...

Mini Bio (1)

Mike Figueiredo is an actor, known for What Waits in the Dark (2011).



Join me on July 29th for National #DumpDemsDay! Switch to independent in protest of the Party's corruption.