[Dan in Wichita]

I don’t recall the Democrats needing approval from a judge to question the outcome of the 2016 election.

[CFW]

“I don’t recall the Democrats needing approval from a judge to question the outcome of the 2016 election.”

---

That’s (D)ifferent!

Also, truth should be a defense to any claims of libel or slander. However, Courts refuse to allow Trump access to the evidence that proves his statements true.

In addition, President Trump or citizen Trump has a First Amendment right to question the election results in 2020. As did the democrats in 2016. The democrats and the government agencies, however, did not have the right in 2016 to create false evidence that their claims were true. However, they have gotten away with it.

[mass55th]

"I don’t recall the Democrats needing approval from a judge to question the outcome of the 2016 election."

I don't remember anyone calling for Gore to be indicted in 2000, when he sought to overturn the election results in Florida.

[Sacajaweau]

The USSC ruled...

[cymbeline]

“I don’t recall the Democrats needing approval from a judge to question the outcome of the 2016 election.”

Someone needs to explain to both of us what’s illegal about complaining about an election.

[EBH]

Nore those hanging chad’s in Florida...

[Fledermaus]

Or 2004 and 2000.

[Zathras]

I was in Portland visiting friends after the election.
Wall to wall protests.

[CottonBall]

Good point!

Censorship nor fascism wasn’t in place then.

[GOPJ]

I don’t recall the Democrats needing approval from a judge to question the outcome of the 2016 election.

Yeah, I don't remember that happening either.

[matt04]

Don’t forget the 2004 election.