Wilder should fight Bryan or Charr this year

[JakeTheBoxer]

Pick WBA whatever belt and than probably he gets a chance against Fury -Joshua winner in 2022.

This is his only chance. Go WBA route, pick one of 4 belts available ( lol). Wilder is well known fighter, he will be important again, with the belt in his hands.

[davefromvancouv]

Pick WBA whatever belt and than probably he gets a chance against Fury -Joshua winner in 2022.

This is his only chance. Go WBA route, pick one of 4 belts available ( lol). Wilder is well known fighter, he will be important again, with the belt in his hands.

The arbitration case is still ongoing for the Wilder-Fury trilogy. If Wilder wins, he'll be fighting Fury.

[Spray_resistant]

He has to get in line behind Fres Oquendo who won a lawsuit is will get a shot at the WBA title.

[daggum]

The arbitration case is still ongoing for the Wilder-Fury trilogy. If Wilder wins, he'll be fighting Fury.

is that true? wilder and court cases dont seem to go together. remember when he tried to sue povetkin and lost? that was hilarious. seems like hes running a trump scam where in public he says voter fraud!!! then in court he says there was no voter fraud your honor. wilder is pretending he wants to fight fury so he doesnt look like such a coward/loser but in reality he will fight ortiz again

[davefromvancouv]

is that true? wilder and court cases dont seem to go together. remember when he tried to sue povetkin and lost? that was hilarious. seems like hes running a trump scam where in public he says voter fraud!!! then in court he says there was no voter fraud your honor. wilder is pretending he wants to fight fury so he doesnt look like such a coward/loser but in reality he will fight ortiz again

Not sure where you get your information, but at no point has any evidence about voter fraud been allowed to be presented in the courts.

And as far as Wilder is concerned, he was cheated by Povetkin and has been avoided like the plague by Fury. Which counters the false narrative that Fury actually beat him in a fair fight. So I'm expecting Fury to either retire or happily pay Wilder half his purse to avoid letting Wilder get his hands on him.

[daggum]

Not sure where you get your information, but at no point has any evidence about voter fraud been allowed to be presented in the courts.

And as far as Wilder is concerned, he was cheated by Povetkin and has been avoided like the plague by Fury. Which counters the false narrative that Fury actually beat him in a fair fight. So I'm expecting Fury to either retire or happily pay Wilder half his purse to avoid letting Wilder get his hands on him.

it hasnt been allowed to be presented...

ill choose a select few for you just so you can see you were lied to.



under questioning from the judge, he retreated. “This is not a fraud case,” Giuliani later admitted. In the same case, Trump lawyer Linda Kearns said explicitly that she is “not proceeding” on allegations of fraud.

The judge pressed Goldstein to answer the specific question: “Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?” To which Goldstein replied: “To my knowledge at present, no.”

In yet another state case in Bucks County, Pa., Trump’s attorneys signed a joint stipulation of facts that explicitly admits that they are not alleging fraud. Petitioners do not allege, and there is no evidence of, any fraud in connection with the challenged ballots.” The stipulation also says they don’t allege or have evidence of “misconduct” or “impropriety” in connection with the challenged ballots.

Trump campaign attorney Kory Langhofer told a judge, “We are not alleging fraud in this lawsuit. We are not alleging anyone stealing the election.”


my source https://time.com/5914377/donald-trum...vidence-fraud/

i think what you meant to say was trumps lawyers didnt allow themselves to present any voter fraud evidence since they didnt have any and you cant lie in court or you will lose your license. like i said trump and his layers in interviews and press conferences fraud fraud fraud! trump and his lawyers in court "there is no fraud your honor" propaganda is a dangerous thing. find some different sources for your info, real ones. i know being deprogrammed is a tough thing to do but you can do it! take care and good luck!

[davefromvancouv]

it hasnt been allowed to be presented...

ill choose a select few for you just so you can see you were lied to.



under questioning from the judge, he retreated. “This is not a fraud case,” Giuliani later admitted. In the same case, Trump lawyer Linda Kearns said explicitly that she is “not proceeding” on allegations of fraud.

The judge pressed Goldstein to answer the specific question: “Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?” To which Goldstein replied: “To my knowledge at present, no.”

In yet another state case in Bucks County, Pa., Trump’s attorneys signed a joint stipulation of facts that explicitly admits that they are not alleging fraud. Petitioners do not allege, and there is no evidence of, any fraud in connection with the challenged ballots.” The stipulation also says they don’t allege or have evidence of “misconduct” or “impropriety” in connection with the challenged ballots.

Trump campaign attorney Kory Langhofer told a judge, “We are not alleging fraud in this lawsuit. We are not alleging anyone stealing the election.”


my source https://time.com/5914377/donald-trum...vidence-fraud/

i think what you meant to say was trumps lawyers didnt allow themselves to present any voter fraud evidence since they didnt have any and you cant lie in court or you will lose your license. like i said trump and his layers in interviews and press conferences fraud fraud fraud! trump and his lawyers in court "there is no fraud your honor" propaganda is a dangerous thing. find some different sources for your info, real ones. i know being deprogrammed is a tough thing to do but you can do it! take care and good luck!

Ah.

So your source gives you examples of specific cases where no fraud was alleged, the judge asks if there is fraud alleged, and the lawyer says no.

But...

Your source does NOT tell you that there were some fraud lawsuits and some constitutional lawsuits.In all the cases where fraud was alleged, the cases were thrown out for lack of standing. Even though there was standing.

Your source conflates the two sets of lawsuits to decredit the allegations.

It's called pushing a false narrative.

Much like the narrative that Wilder is ducking Fury, where in reality, the exact opposite is happening.

Here is my source.

http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm

And it's not a matter of being lied to. It's a matter of understanding that every news source spins a story to fit their particular narrative. In many instances, you have to do your own research and listen to the source directly. Then watch how it's spun.

[daggum]

Ah.

So your source gives you examples of specific cases where no fraud was alleged, the judge asks if there is fraud alleged, and the lawyer says no.

But...

Your source does NOT tell you that there were some fraud lawsuits and some constitutional lawsuits.In all the cases where fraud was alleged, the cases were thrown out for lack of standing. Even though there was standing.

Your source conflates the two sets of lawsuits to decredit the allegations.

It's called pushing a false narrative.

Much like the narrative that Wilder is ducking Fury, where in reality, the exact opposite is happening.

Here is my source.

http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm

And it's not a matter of being lied to. It's a matter of understanding that every news source spins a story to fit their particular narrative. In many instances, you have to do your own research and listen to the source directly. Then watch how it's spun.

hmmm yeah you arent getting it. this site you linked is including pre election court decisions lmao. yeah he won some of those which were to supress the vote cong****! we dont want people voting now do we gop? they love democracy right? how about a national voting holiday? how about automatica voter registraiton? how about equal polling places per district? hmm they are against all those things how weird! and post election he lost them all but one and the one he won was some ticky tack crap about how many feet the observers were supposed to be.

and i dont think you know what standing means. you seem to use it as a catch all for "they didnt let us show the evidence!" but thats not what it means. for example in Bowyer et al. v. Ducey et al. they did claim voter fraud you are right...but it wasnt based on anything as the experts ruled and yet the case was thrown out for...drum roll....standing! dont make me go over the others. completely different courts and experts found the same exact findings which should tell you all you need to know.

you can read the report here. https://gking.harvard.edu/files/gkin...rtreportaz.pdf

you want to see what their "evidence" was? here is a snipet...

Plaintiffs allege in Count One that Defendants violated the Elections and Electors Clauses and 28 U.S.C. § 1983 by, among other things, losing or destroying absentee ballots, and/or replacing those ballots with “blank ballots filled out by election workers, Dominion or other third parties” sending thousands of absentee ballots to someone besides the registered voter that “could have been filled out by anyone.”

wow thats some great evidence! the ballots could have beenfilled out by someone else! not that they were. no evidence that they were but that they could have! and we could be in the matrix! where is the evidence they were filled out by someone else or replaced? cause you say they were? you see what i mean? they just threw a bunch of gish gallop at the court ad the court destroyed it all cause there was nothing to support it. recounts were done, audits were done. nothing!


here is the conclusion...

I conclude that the evidence is insufficient to support conclusions
about election fraud. Throughout, the authors break the chain of evidence repeatedly – from the
2020 election, to the data analyzed, to the quantitative results presented, to the conclusions
drawn – and as such cannot be relied on.

The Court's ruling in this case concluded "Not only have Plaintiffs failed to provide the Court with factual support for their extraordinary claims, but they have wholly failed to establish that they have standing for the Court to consider them. Allegations that find favor in the public sphere of gossip and innuendo cannot be a substitute for earnest pleadings and procedure in federal court. They most certainly cannot be the basis for upending Arizona’s 2020 General Election. The Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss this matter in its entirety."

so once again where is the voter fraud? i read their report directly and there is nothing there. they went to court and said oh there isnt voter fraud in most of the cases even though they said that over and over in the media and the cases where they did say that their evidence was "someone else filled out the ballots" and ridiculous unsubstantiated claims. thats not evidence. they went into court with nothing! they knew they had nothing. they just hoped the courts were partisan and would overthrow democracy. please seek help. start now. dont come up with excuses about well this was the bad lawsuit, the others show the real fraud. this is not healthy. now smartmatic is suing their asses so i hope they take them to the cleaners or wait now they have a chance to show all the evidence!!! a great result for them right?

[JakeTheBoxer]

He has to get in line behind Fres Oquendo who won a lawsuit is will get a shot at the WBA title.

Obviously not. Wilder plans to fight Dinu next.