(12-11-2020 03:47 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 01:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  Did these states in question violate their own election law(s)? By rule, it’s likely they did.

What’ll be done? Who knows.

And why did they violate their own election law? Why this election? What made them even evaluate the process? Hmmmmm...

The problem is, Trump ordered the post office to make the mail be slow as a snail. It was a way for Trump illegally to disenfranchised millions of voters.

Probably one of the dumbest posts EVER on this board. Ever. That’s an amazing accomplishment. Congratulations.

(12-11-2020 03:52 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 03:48 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 03:41 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 03:34 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Then, if you throw out these voters to disenfranchised them? The Republicans in those states will lose those votes, and give their seats to the Democrats. I am hearing from Republicans that these Republicans that signed this are getting on the edge of TREASON. These are Republican Constitution lawyers saying this.

The vote from the Supreme Court will be 9-0 against this fraud that was filed by a state DA in Texas who is about going to jail. He is only doing this to fish a pardon out of Trump.

Related:

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch...llegations

interesting timing.
Could it be the TX AG poked the swampbear and the swampbear doesn't like it?

This whistleblower thing came out in October when the complaints was made. It was before the election.

I stand corrected.

(12-11-2020 02:35 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

Quote:Texas’ attempt to bring an original action challenging the election results in four states is not a serious legal claim in a legitimate procedural posture, for reasons that many people have already given and that I will not repeat here. The easy thing for the Supreme Court to do is simply deny Texas permission to file the complaint (and deny the motions to intervene as moot) and be done with it. No fuss, no muss.

But the court should do more.

The justices’ decision whether to do that needs to account for this extraordinary, dangerous moment for our democracy. President donald trump, other supportive Republicans, and aligned commentators have firmly convinced many tens of millions of people that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. If that view continues to take hold, it threatens not only our national politics for the next four years but the public’s basic faith in elections of all types that are the foundations of our society.

Every once in a long while, the court needs to invest some of its accumulated capital in issuing judgments that are not only legally right but also respond to imminent, tangible threats to the nation. That is particularly appropriate when, as here, the court finds itself being used as a tool to actively undermine faith in our democratic institutions — including by the members of the court’s bar on whom the justices depend to act much more responsibly.

In a time that is so very deeply polarized, I cannot think of a person, group or institution other than the Supreme Court that could do better for the country right now. Supporters of the president who have been gaslighted into believing that there has been a multi-state conspiracy to steal the election recognize that the court is not a liberal institution. If the court will tell the truth, the country will listen.

Opinion: Don’t just deny Texas’ original action. Decimate it.

Well, that's not a biased view at all. No sir. Given that the majority of lawyers in this country are leftists, it is quite easy to find an opinion that agrees with your own.

This fool doesn't for a second consider the PRECEDENT that would be set should SCOTUS decide not to take this case. If the Constitution means nothing (which is what they would be signaling should they decline to hear the case) then why should anybody follow the law? They have one purpose - to protect and defend the Constitution of these United States. If they are too gutless to even hear it, the justices should resign.

This fool further talks about the danger to the country. Of course, like most leftists afflicted with TDS, he is speaking of the danger he perceives from a Trump Presidency, not the danger that ignoring what is laid out in the Constitution regarding the operation of elections which involve National candidates for office like the Presidency.

Too many foolish leftists among us will be the downfall of the USA. Long live her memory if this fraud of an election is let stand. Nobody except lefties who live in their fantasy bubble will have any faith in the most important and only institution where we the people get any direct input - elections. Then we will have become a banana republic, run as an authoritarian state into the ground, like most leftist countries end up. Congrats, dems. You will have destroyed the last free nation in the world, the one that people looked to in hopes of being free.

When surveying the ashes of what was once a great nation, of course, the left will blame Trump for it. They never take responsibility for the things they do that end in disaster. It's somebody else's fault.

(12-11-2020 02:46 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:00 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 01:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  Why this election? What made them even evaluate the process? Hmmmmm...

I'll take a global pandemic causing disruptions to how much people get out in public for $500, Alex.

Pick up some bread when you go to the store. But I'll be damned if I will go Vote in person. That's some BS there.

I know plenty of people who to this day are getting their groceries delivered and/or picking up curbside - most of us who are getting out voted in person, including myself, but there are certainly others who aren't.

Call it BS all you want, it doesn't change the facts - that's exactly why it came up in this election, and why they evaluated the process.

You said. "most of us who are getting out voted in person" You notice Shelby County didn't have any problems that I know about. I wonder why, Because we had to get out and Vote and we set a record for early voting. But other places have mail-in Ballots. What could go wrong.

(12-11-2020 04:40 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:46 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:00 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 01:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  Why this election? What made them even evaluate the process? Hmmmmm...

I'll take a global pandemic causing disruptions to how much people get out in public for $500, Alex.

Pick up some bread when you go to the store. But I'll be damned if I will go Vote in person. That's some BS there.

I know plenty of people who to this day are getting their groceries delivered and/or picking up curbside - most of us who are getting out voted in person, including myself, but there are certainly others who aren't.

Call it BS all you want, it doesn't change the facts - that's exactly why it came up in this election, and why they evaluated the process.

You said. "most of us who are getting out voted in person" You notice Shelby County didn't have any problems that I know about. I wonder why, Because we had to get out and Vote and we set a record for early voting. But other places have mail-in Ballots. What could go wrong.

According to the evidence presented in court, nothing went wrong.

Quote:Less than 24 hours ago, we reported on Rush Limbaugh’s dire warning to his followers that given the extreme political divides in the country, there could be a day in the future when we witness states make real attempts to secede from the Union.

According to The Hill, we’re getting somewhat of a little dose of that sentiment right now as two pseudo-states, known as “New Nevada” and “New California” officially filed amicus briefs in support of Texas’ attempt to overturn the election results in four swing states in the nation’s High Court.

In joining the multi-state efforts to prove that the results of the 2020 election in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania should be voided, New Nevada and New California wrote that they were “directly impacted by the arbitrary and capricious changes in election laws and procedures occur with unfortunate regularity in the current States of California and Nevada.”

For a little background on the two “new” states, they’re both comprised of rural, red-leaning counties in their respective states, where people feel like they’re never fairly represented given how blue the rest of the states are in the population centers. New California declared its “independence” in 2018 and fights to become the 51st state.

At the crux of their argument, the two “new” states argued that both absentee votes and in-person votes were not handled in a uniform manner across both states. They also claimed that voters who registered early were treated differently than those who registered to cast their vote on election day.

Robert E. Thomas III, chairman of the New Nevada State movement, added to the brief that “disparate treatment is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Adding to the strength and PR power of the Texas SCOTUS case is the fact that at least 18 other states, and counting, have signed on in some level of support of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Adding to that was the addition of at least 106 Republican lawmakers who joined up with Texas in the fight, all issuing similar arguments as the states.

Making the case even more noteworthy is President Donald Trump, who officially signed on to the case and even asked Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to argue the merits of the case should the Supreme Court decide to hear it.

Whether or not the High Court will even entertain taking the case is anyone’s guess. As of this writing, there hasn’t even been a hint of which way they might go, as the case is only filed on the SCOTUS docket still at this point. A range of outcomes are possible, with some predicting it will be a full-on Supreme Court battle and others predicting that they’ll reject the case just as fast as they did the recent Pennsylvania case.

Link

(12-11-2020 04:53 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 04:40 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:46 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:00 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  I'll take a global pandemic causing disruptions to how much people get out in public for $500, Alex.

Pick up some bread when you go to the store. But I'll be damned if I will go Vote in person. That's some BS there.

I know plenty of people who to this day are getting their groceries delivered and/or picking up curbside - most of us who are getting out voted in person, including myself, but there are certainly others who aren't.

Call it BS all you want, it doesn't change the facts - that's exactly why it came up in this election, and why they evaluated the process.

You said. "most of us who are getting out voted in person" You notice Shelby County didn't have any problems that I know about. I wonder why, Because we had to get out and Vote and we set a record for early voting. But other places have mail-in Ballots. What could go wrong.

According to the evidence presented in court, nothing went wrong.

Damn some of you are slow.
Not one evidentiary hearing has taken place.
Dismissals only. Dig into what that means.

DENIED.

As I said before, the courts do not want to hear these cases. This was again yet another case that was NOT decided on the merits. The SC issued a statement found that Texas had no standing to challenge another states election. If you will notice---these cases are never adjudicated based on the whether the states violated the law---EVERYBODY knows they did. The reality is everyone is scared to follow the law. I actually think the summer riots paved the way for the Democrats to cheat in the election and know there would be no real consequences. We now live in a nation where mob violence is the key lever. If you can round up a violent mob to support your cause---you're going to get your way. So---there ya go conservatives---you are now entirely boxed in. You either accept hard left rule enforced by violent mobs, leave the nation, or organize your own violent mobs---thems your choices. Seventeen states wanted to be peaceably heard before the court and were told "no".

If there is violence--and I will be surprised if there is none---it will be because the law wasnt followed and every single court that should have represented a place of justice where each side's case could be heard in its entirety---were afraid to do their job. That failure of any judicial body to provide a reasonable forum where the parties could be heard may be more concerning to me than the BS that clearly occurred in this election.

(12-11-2020 06:39 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 04:53 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 04:40 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:46 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 02:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  Pick up some bread when you go to the store. But I'll be damned if I will go Vote in person. That's some BS there.

I know plenty of people who to this day are getting their groceries delivered and/or picking up curbside - most of us who are getting out voted in person, including myself, but there are certainly others who aren't.

Call it BS all you want, it doesn't change the facts - that's exactly why it came up in this election, and why they evaluated the process.

You said. "most of us who are getting out voted in person" You notice Shelby County didn't have any problems that I know about. I wonder why, Because we had to get out and Vote and we set a record for early voting. But other places have mail-in Ballots. What could go wrong.

According to the evidence presented in court, nothing went wrong.

Damn some of you are slow.
Not one evidentiary hearing has taken place.
Dismissals only. Dig into what that means.

It means no case was made to move beyond an initial hearing.

What’s next?

(12-11-2020 06:46 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  What’s next?

Moving vans

Time to move on...evidence was flimsy to overturn that many states.

Just heard that the Supreme Court declined the hear the Texas lawsuit. Pretty obvious that they didn't want to have to make hard decisions that affect a highly contested election.

Very disappointed in this decision. Things could get really dicey now and going forward.

(12-11-2020 06:46 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  What’s next?

Civil War...

(12-11-2020 06:47 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  Time to move on...evidence was flimsy to overturn that many states.

As anyone with a modicum of common sense saw after over 50 other lawsuits got thrown out.

The DA has now done what was expected of him so Trump can pardon him on his way out.

(12-11-2020 06:49 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:46 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  What’s next?

Civil War...

Good Lord. What snowflakes.

The election was legitimate, and they recounted/re-checked, and numbers were still correct.

(12-11-2020 06:50 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:49 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:46 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  What’s next?

Civil War...

Good Lord. What snowflakes.

The election was legitimate, and they recounted/re-checked, and numbers were still correct.

Snowflakes melt under heat, Patriots don’t.

If the election was legitimate, why were the so many claims of voter fraud? The only reason the the SCOTUS did not hear the case was because Texas didn’t have a standing... not because there wasn’t any fraud.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The State of Texas’s motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot. Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.

(12-11-2020 06:53 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:50 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:49 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:46 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  What’s next?

Civil War...

Good Lord. What snowflakes.

The election was legitimate, and they recounted/re-checked, and numbers were still correct.

Snowflakes melt under heat, Patriots don’t.

If the election was legitimate, why were the so many claims of voter fraud? The only reason the the SCOTUS did not hear the case was because Texas didn’t have a standing... not because there wasn’t any fraud.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

and we’re still waiting for a legitimate claim. Unlike the propaganda war on the internet, legal claims ultimately have to be proven in a court of law. You all still have your conspiracies to cling, and I’m sure they’ll get better as they age, but Joe Biden won the election and will be sworn in 1/20/2021.

(12-11-2020 06:50 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:49 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(12-11-2020 06:46 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  What’s next?

Civil War...

Good Lord. What snowflakes.

The election was legitimate, and they recounted/re-checked, and numbers were still correct.

You're full of it.

Anybody who can't see what has happened is an idiot or too blinded by their own tribalism. It was not legitimate. Or are all those who witnessed blatant illegality and signed sworn affidavits all lying, at peril of perjury? There were far too many irregularities in this election, most of them occurring in swing states for this to have been clean. Proving it is another matter and far too many judges did not want to have to rule on it so they took the easy way out and found other reasons not to deal with it.

When there are this many coincidences, all benefiting one candidate, they are no longer coincidences. The list of things one has to believe to think that a candidate who didn't even really campaign and couldn't draw flies to his events actually won this election is long. Those who believe them are double digit morons or just low info voters.