Couldn't the court have helped more by actually ruling in Trump's favor?

Right. No reason to rush into the important filings.

You simply don't understand legal procedure in these types of cases. Meeting the evidentiary burden at the initial stage is critical, and the appeal would be predicated on meeting this burden. The SC is not where you present new evidence. The SC is where you argue that the lower courts erred in light of evidence already presented.

You are kind of mixing up legal strategies from different arenas of law. In the present case, it is highly important to present enough evidence to the judges to clear the hurdle of contesting rhe election. Holding back and losing hearings is not a viable strategy.

I thought it was the left that rioted with violence? Isn't that their thing? We do the peaceful protest?

OK try your free speech out on the n-word.

Try using that word in the real world and see how many gay friends you end up with.

It depends on the county. These were more to Trump, but that doesn't have to always be the case.

Because this race is separated by 10 votes only.

Right, because it would make no sense to release anything this week.

1. You are advocating illegal violent behavior that will land you in prison. You are not searching for fraud. You are just doing BLM style vandalism.
2. You actually know how to reliably locate every single physical ballot, voting machine, electronic voting records, backups of the above, copies of the above that have been circulated or sent to a central location, backups of that central location, etc.? We are talking about entire state of PA.
3. The election has been certified by all states now.

You are mentioning fantasy and "of course he is going to win" in the same post. Reality pretty much dicates we recognize that overturning the results of the election across multiple states is a longshot.

Trump should have pardoned Snowden before the election. Would have swung many libertarians over.

A judgement has not been made that those are illegal.

I disagree. The arguments i am reading in the complaint are terrible. Has anyone actually read this thing?

The number one biggest argument is a constitutional equal protection argument - that in-person ballots have a different level of protection than mail-in. One glaring weakness of this argument is that no voter is compelled to use one over the other.

In addition, reading the argument - starting at paragraph 12 - there is a weird logic. An argument is made that the mail-in system is more lax. So what? Imagine that every vote is legal and valid. How does a more lax system alone make anything unfair. Mail-in voting is observed or not observed - results would be the same.

Evidence of actual fraud is required. Merely alleging different levels of observation and checking is not evidence of unfairness. The complaint goes on for many pages arguing for necessity of specific levels of observation. Not sure how valid that is, but seems to me pointless without evidence of actual fraud, which I cannot seem to find.

Text of complaint: https://cdn.donaldjtrump.com/public-files/press_assets/2020-11-09-complaint-as-filed.pdf

Because he blamed a whole class of people based on ethnicity or religion or both, without much regard for individuals. Pretty bigoted.

Victory in an unfair way destroys the democracy you live in. You might like it now - you will not like it 2 or 4 years from now.

I feel like there is a thirst for a news station that literally will never have an article remotely critical of Trump. Why is this a good thing? That is equivalent to a yes-man on every single issue. Do you guys really think that Trump is incapable of doing anything that any Trump supporter may not like? People love Trump for different reasons. To have a sycophantic network from every possible viewpoint is neither possible nor desireable.

Example Newsmax article that someone may not like (talk of 2024 run):

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/trump-2024/2020/11/11/id/996634/

100% sure? It's a longshot still. Certainly possible, but a longshot.

Ah ok. Though I read on your link that the 1/1/1800 birthdate is used for confidentiality reasons, for example for persons who are victims of abuse.

Most of the people here have like zero idea of the evidence required to overturn an election result. It's just high energy rah rah rah. You would think a most obvious sticky would be a list of filings so far and their status. There is not one, probably for the simple reason that most every filing has been rejected by the courts for lack of evidence.

Here is National Review's response to Steve Cortes. https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/no-there-were-not-95000-biden-only-ballots-in-georgia/

How do we know those are BIden voters?

"trust the plan"? sounds like something sheeple say

The problem is once you sort of agree that the president has this extra power, it is hard to take it away. You might like it now. You may not like it when there is a Democrat president.

I think you have a good point there. But if we are only testing some percentage of the population, you potentially have a huge unknown in the percentage not tested. So it is hard to draw good conclusions. Whereas you have a much firmer grasp of total population and covid deaths.