Against my hopes, Trump did talk about election fraud at C-PAC, questions

Sorry but I don't have the time to fact check this so go easy on me. I just want to address something Trump said with regards to election fraud
These are not his exact words but he said something about "the law was broken by rule changes very close to election day that were not validated by state legislatures"
Is there any truth to this claim trump made?
Keep it civil people. Keep this thread on topic with that ONE thing Trump said for which this thread is intended to be about
Thanks

 

You already know he was lying.

 

If I did, as a person that likes Trump I wouldn't dare make this thread (that would be some low hanging fruit)
This is a legit thread with legit question

 

That claim was rejected more than once in court while President Trump was appealing the election. It is an opinion by the former President's election campaign that states can't change a part the election process without the approval of the legislature. One state said they would accept mail in votes up until Friday (used to be Wednesday) because of problems with the mail as long as the postmark was election day or before.
The former President's lawyers wanted to challenge the election because the state legislature had not voted in this change. The courts said "no".

 

So does this mean even though that IS supposed to happen , it didn't happen because pro-left judges decided to ignore this law, or was it never a law begin with and Trump 100% fabricated that it has to be state approved?

 

If Dirty Donalds lips are moving he's lying.

 

No he was stating what he believes.

 

it’s true but it was taken to courts and courts allowed it. Believe state supreme court allowed it even though what happened violated rules

 

Against my hopes, Trump did talk about election fraud at C-PAC, questions

Yes it was bad politics. People are tired of hearing it just like they tired of hearing Hillary make the same claims from the prior election. Dwelling on it hurts him and his agenda without helping in any way. When he got to that point in his speech, my wife and I changed channels and watched an episode of "Pacific" on the History channel. We didn't return to the rally.

 

What he believes is the money will keep flowing in from his minions as long as he can convince them that those bad Democrats stole the election.

 

I think the opposite is true. Just as people tired of Hillary claiming her election was stolen, people are tired of Trump claiming the same thing. If he continues he will turn all those followers off. It may well have been a bad election but it is over.

 

Here’s just a few examples of pro-Right judges.

Brett H. Ludwig, whom Trump nominated to a U.S. District Court in Wisconsin in 2017. Earlier this month, he called the Trump campaign’s request to have the GOP-appointed Wisconsin legislature pick new presidential electors “bizarre.” And he followed that up Saturday by ruling against the “extraordinary” lawsuit.


A Trump Federal appeals court nominee, Stephanos Bibas, who ruled against the Trump campaign in late November in Pennsylvania.
“Charges of unfairness are serious,” Bibas wrote on behalf of a three-judge panel. “But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”


Another federal appeals court ruled against another extraordinary case brought by pro-Trump lawyer L. Lin Wood. Of the three judges on that panel, two were finalists for Trump’s Supreme Court vacancies — William Pryor and Barbara Lagoa — and Lagoa was initially selected for the appeals court by Trump.

Trump’s effort has also been rebuked in two lower-profile cases.
One came from Judge Andrew Brasher, whom Trump has nominated twice — first as a district court judge in 2018 and then as a circuit court judge just a year ago. Brasher denied a request from Wood and former Trump team lawyer Sidney Powell on Dec. 4, calling the litigation “last-minute” and noting that it sought “sweeping relief.” Brasher declined

 

She and the rest of the country might have thought the Electoral College was a farce but when did she concede the election to trump????? When did trump concede????? No comparison dude.

 

You're forgetting that trump is a malignant narcissist and can't help himself.
And given the calibre of his cult, most will continue to believe it forever.

 

No it isn't. A cursory look at the topic leads immediately to the scotus case that dealt with it succinctly.
Here, educate yourself.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...611533_TX-v-State-Motion-2020-12-07 FINAL.pdf

 

duplicate

 

A recipe for Failure ............

Republican Party is now an organization based on Trumps personality instead of Republican policies

 

Yes, this is true.

 

just because a person believes something does not make it true..

millions of children believe santa clause drives a sleigh pulled by Rudolph

but we all know santa drives an amazon truck

 

The comparison is quite valid. The details are different. Clinton is still claiming her election was stolen. She blamed countless people and enven countries for it and she even wrote a book about it. You know these things. You are defending her for partisanship, not common sense.

 

I agree. But my point was that Trump wasn't lying. He was stating his opinion based on what he believes. I've seen lists of "lies" told by Trump and the majority are opinions based on what he believed. Most, in fact, were in line with my own beliefs. Opinions are just opinions. Truth needs to be proven and there hasn't been an investigation of the 2020 election. There never will be one.

 

Yes, there is always hyperbole and misplaced blame. Great debate methodology.

 

Any one with half a brain knows that Jim Comey put a dent in her election and any one familiar with Mueller's report knows the Russians did influence the outcome. She still did the honorable thing. trump doesn't know the meaning of honor.

 

What a trooper!

 

Par for the course there, just as predictable and unremarkable as the Sun rising....