General Discussion

Escurumbele

(4,085 posts)

15. Sorry, I repeated what you said... I keep telling myself to read other responses so I don't repeat.

Thu May 6, 2021, 05:16 PM

May 2021

But yes, I am with you...The law is clear, why the doubt?

It almost sounds like "the law says it is illegal, but we may press charges, or we may not"...I am so tired of this vagueness.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

New: Justice Dept warns GOP-led audit of the 2020 election ballots in Arizona that turning over mate [View all] soothsayer May 2021 OP

Oh. A warning. I feel so much better. CrispyQ May 2021 #1

I know what you mean. Maybe we just aren't hearing about it? soothsayer May 2021 #3

Be very very careful Crispy DENVERPOPS May 2021 #17

It's not the "Democrat Party" HuskyOffset May 2021 #25

Sorry HO DENVERPOPS May 2021 #30

Noun: Democrat. Adjective: Democratic. Mister Ed May 2021 #31

Democrat as a slur goes back to the 19th century, and has been systematically used by Celerity May 2021 #32

Now, I am seriously confused....... DENVERPOPS May 2021 #35

we are Democrats (noun), we belong to the Democratic (adjective) Party Celerity May 2021 #36

I am out of here.............. DENVERPOPS May 2021 #37

I do not understand why you are so upset Celerity May 2021 #38

I am a Democrat. I am a supporter of the Democratic Party. Aristus May 2021 #48

It was started in the 50s The Wizard May 2021 #33

Apologies to you DENVERPOPS HuskyOffset May 2021 #44

I agree. DOJ needs to heed Teddy Roosevelt: 'Speak softly but carry a big stick.' triron May 2021 #41

Why didn't they do the recount in a bar? BlueJac May 2021 #2

How about the bar DENVERPOPS May 2021 #18

Excellent. Between the loaded guns, the alcohol, and potential food poisoning, what could be niyad May 2021 #51

republicans know it is illegal ... . . Lovie777 May 2021 #4

If there are no consequences, then.... triron May 2021 #42

Ummm. Isn't it a little late for that? -(nt)- stopdiggin May 2021 #5

COULD????? WTF? spanone May 2021 #6

Sorry, I repeated what you said... I keep telling myself to read other responses so I don't repeat. Escurumbele May 2021 #15

NO SHIT escu.......NC DENVERPOPS May 2021 #20

Look at it this way.... albacore May 2021 #7

Yeah, hopefully they'll take this as a wake up call to stop the nonsense soothsayer May 2021 #9

Any Sensible Person... Deacon Blue May 2021 #27

The legislators who voted to do this DURHAM D May 2021 #8

AND the AG and governor who let them do this ancianita May 2021 #22

Susan Collins now in charge of the DOJ? Dan May 2021 #10

Actually, you know what I would like to see DENVERPOPS May 2021 #23

The good news is all the Arizona ballots Mr.Bill May 2021 #11

Ooh I like this take soothsayer May 2021 #19

Yep. ancianita May 2021 #24

Ya think?? Rhiannon12866 May 2021 #12

Boom......... turbinetree May 2021 #13

"COULD"??? If they know the law, and they should (Justice Dept), there should be no "COULD" Escurumbele May 2021 #14

Why would this not have surfaced at the very beginning of this travesty? BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #16

The EXACT question I ask DENVERPOPS May 2021 #21

The wheels of justice grind slowly but surely. Elessar Zappa May 2021 #40

I have no answer, just all but useless conjecture. BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #45

Maybe the DOJ has had to get their evidence and argument ducks in a row, ancianita May 2021 #28

That's an excellent thought. BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #46

I hope it means they were setting a trap -- giving them enough rope to hang themselves. n/t pnwmom May 2021 #29

That could certainly be the case. BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #47

The Democrats tried to nip it, but Judge Daniel Martin let it go forward, though the judge ancianita May 2021 #49

His opinion of their privacy procedures isn't enough to issue at least a temporary injunction? BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #55

That's what plaintiffs asked for, but I guess he decided to let it go forward, seeing whether ancianita May 2021 #57

Isn't that obvious? Lettuce Be May 2021 #26

Mr Garland is a VERY bright man, there's a strategy here. NoMoreRepugs May 2021 #34

Kick dalton99a May 2021 #39

I thought that was an odd way to do a recount. Turning ballots over to a partisan private company UCmeNdc May 2021 #43

Republicans got the Sec of State to allow it. Apparently, ancianita May 2021 #50

it is blatantly illegal and I said this over a week ago garybeck May 2021 #52

Will the FULL COST of this bullshit recount ever be known bluestarone May 2021 #53

NPR article: scipan May 2021 #54

A warning was needed for this? I thought it was assumed. LiberatedUSA May 2021 #56