Davin News Server

NV Supreme Court ruled that ballots arriving 3 days after the Election will be counted.

This is another way they will steal the election.

=====

Nevada Supreme Court: Count Mailed Ballots 3 Days After Election Day Even Without Postmark

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled Monday the state can count mailed ballots that arrive without a postmark up to three days after Election Day 
on Nov. 5.

The Republican National Committee and former President Donald Trump's campaign committee had sought to block the counting of ballots 
without postmarks in the swing state, and the party has fought in other states to prevent counting ballots that arrive after Election Day.

But the state's Supreme Court upheld the August decision by District Court Judge James Russell, who refused to block the counting of 
ballots without postmarks because of the importance of counting all eligible votes. Russell also found Republicans wouldn't be irreparably 
harmed by counting late-arriving ballots because few votes were at stake.


"As explained in the legislative history, the purpose of the bill was 'to expand the ways in which people vote,' and make it easier for 
voters to exercise their freedom to vote," Chief Justice Elissa Cadish wrote for the court.

Tossup states such as Nevada have become a legal battleground over rules in the closely contested election. Republicans have focused many 
of their cases on the rules for voter registration and counting mailed ballots.

Nevada State law allows for mailed ballots to be counted when they are returned to county clerks by 5 p.m. on the fourth day after Election 
Day with a postmark by Election Day. If 'the date of the postmark cannot be determined," ballots received by 5 p.m. three days after 
Election Day 'shall been deemed to have been postmarked on or before the day of the election."

The RNC argued that voters could ensure their ballots were postmarked correctly by visiting the post office, but the state supreme court 
ruled that isn't possible for homebound voters or those with post offices far away. The court ruled that lawmakers intended to count 
ballots without postmarks or with smudged postmarks.

Justice Douglas Herndon and Justice Kristina Pickering each agreed separately with the result of the case for lack of harm to the 
Republican plaintiffs. But each voiced concern about counting mailed ballots after Election Day without postmarks.

Herndon wrote that the law was "clear and unambiguous that a mail ballot must contain a postmark."

Russell had found that few votes were at stake in the dispute.

"Particularly given the very small number of ballots apparently at issue - just 24 in the recent primary election - any possible injury to 
Plaintiffs is entirely speculative and hypothetical," Russell wrote.

The ruling comes as election and postal officials urge voters to mail ballots at least a week before Election Day because of potential 
delays in the mail.

Again... they cheated in 2020 too.

===============================================================================

The Liberal Argument Outline 

1. Use spun facts:

These can be found on Huffington Post, Daily Kos, MSNBC, and many other liberal sources. What they do is take facts, polls or arguments and 
add a liberal spin in a weak attempt to make bad news for liberals look good. These are easily debunked and exposed as lies by going to the 
original source and posting the hard, cold facts with NO spin. Note: At this point, you have won. It should never take more than one post 
to win an argument with a liberal. It is recommended that you claim victory and disengage at this point. If you continue, for fun or 
experimental purposes, no further logic will be forthcoming from the liberals.

2. The Next Step For The Liberal Will Be To Attempt To Discredit Your Source:

If it is Fox or any perceived "right wing" source, they will refuse to believe it. If it is a non-partisan source, they will claim it is 
right wing, if it is a left of center source, they will find another lefty source to "prove" you are wrong. They will not discuss the facts 
themselves, as they know they have lost. If you must go down this road (there is a high entertainment value), don't allow this diversion. 
Go back to the facts.

3. The Limbaugh Defense:

This is one that comes out early and often. Although you know they never listen to Rush Limbaugh and have no idea 
what he says, they will drag him out and claim you are a Ditto head. This is another diversionary tactic. It has no relevance and is an 
attempt to change the subject. The more desperate they are, the more childish and ridiculous the reference to Limbaugh becomes: Flush, 
LimpBag, etc. Ignore this and re-post the facts. DO NOT BE DIVERTED.

4. The Personal Attack:

Another common thread. Also designed to divert the lost argument. NEVER give any hint of personal information. Even 
something as innocuous as "I am a chef". They will attempt to engage you and call you a liar to divert attention from the original lost 
argument. Ignore this and re-post the facts yet to be refuted.

5. Name Calling:

Still another diversion. If you fail to give them any personal information, they will attempt to draw you out to gain more 
insight into your personal side. Then they will return to step 4. Ignore this.

6. The Liberal Bat Signal:

When they find out they are unable to engage you, divert you or goad you into a completely irrelevant topic, 
they will send out the Bat Signal. This is where a bunch of Liberals (or often, the same one using several names, i.e., Rudy) post a number 
of rapid fire posts congratulating the Liberal on handing you your head on a platter. This tactic often works on even the most logical and 
disciplined of us. The urge to rant must be resisted. Your rant will supply them with all the personal insight they need to spew hatred and 
personal attacks. The best tactic here is to use the same tactic back at them. Keep in mind, a Liberal will never admit you have a valid 
point (Dutch did, once), much less that you won a debate. So, the only reasons to continue a dialog with a liberal after the initial 
statement of facts that established your victory are for entertainment and educational purposes. If you refuse to take the bait and demand 
the topic remain on the original premise, they will eventually just go away and try to find someone else that will engage them on their 
terms.

Now, go away, Snowflake.