Jump to content
IGNORED

2020 Election Results Part 8: Lawsuits, Qualified Biden Nominees, and a Pouty Toddler


GreyhoundFan

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Audrey2 said:

While I'm quite excited about time magazines people of the year, I am surprised that it wasn't Dr Fauci, since the virus has been the main story of the year. Of course strong supporting stories are the racial issues and the election .

Trumpy's hide is going to be chapped for a long time to come because of this.

Anyone besides me think Time made this selection as a big FU to Trump? That little phrase about the one-term president threw perfect shade.

I'm glad they created a category for Fauci. I had been thinking he and the first responders deserved the people of the year award, but I can definitely live with this choice.

  • Upvote 21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

The great states of New California and New Nevada support Texas 

 

I don't see them defining which parts of California and Nevada would make up these theoretical New states.  

Also they spelled Gavin Newsom's name wrong every single time.

So, basically:  "Please grant legal standing to this entity that does not legally exist."  Alrighty then.

  • Upvote 10
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AmazonGrace said:

The great states of New California and New Nevada support Texas 

 

Came out of Pahrump!  Of course, it did.

1 hour ago, church_of_dog said:

So, basically:  "Please grant legal standing to this entity that does not legally exist."  Alrighty then.

Smack down time.

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

This is basically "we don't believe the results because we didn't win". This mob are unfit to govern, and at this point I hope any remaining moderate Republican voters jump ship completely and let them burn.

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be funny if it weren't so dangerous:

 

  • WTF 1
  • Thank You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Whooping_Butt said:

Ooooh, me too me too.   Please, dear Rufus, in the name of all things too bizarre to contemplate, let this be so. I bet he wants to make eye contact with SCOTUS justices and tell them that they could go through some things if the vote doesn't go his way, especially Brett and Amy.

On a more serious note, what the actual eleventy f**k damn f**k. 

IANAL, BUT I suspect there's zero chance the Supremes will entertain this complete train wreck of a lawsuit and dismiss it.  I hope, in dismissal, they will so thoroughly dismantle and eviscerate this crap that it's permanently done and over.

Electors do their thing this Monday. 

  • Upvote 10
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

It would be funny if it weren't so dangerous:

Texan here and I've been trying to keep up with the Texas AG Ken Paxton corruption issue time line. 

So yes, Ken is obviously wrangling for a Trump pardon -- he could potentially be facing prison time on whatever his latest charges may be.  HOWEVER, there's about a 99.9999% chance that SCOTUS will flush this lawsuit, and Ken Paxton's hopes for a pardon will go down the drain with it.  Trump hates losers, and especially losers who make him look bad. 

That said, if Trump starts handing out pardons like Oprah handing out free stuff (You get a pardon, and you get a pardon and YOU GET A PARDON) maybe one will hit Ken in the head and he'll be free, except for possibly some pesky state charges. 

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

According to Texas, voting as a city POC is illegal in and of itself.

 

Seriously if this bullshit gets a hearing I think the blue states should sue some of the more obviously gerrymandered and obstacle causing states to say that their results have disrupted the election by causing non-representative results. 

Also I am reading Heather Cox Richardson's analysis on FB, and I honestly don't know what I'm more appalled by - the fact so many legislators and states are signing on to this, the lack of response to the pandemic and the utterly horrific death toll, the fact that this is distracting from the pandemic relief bill, that 26 million Americans say they do not have enough to eat, or that the people they have as elected representatives apparently cannot work together to solve this. 

Honestly I think at this point an independent federal body overseeing all elections, from drawing up boundaries, to running electoral rolls, to running the damn things is a priority because apparently states don't trust each other to run elections, and some at least actually cannot be trusted to run free and fair elections. 

Did they put in secession legislation requirements after the Civil War, does anyone know? I mean setting out what states need to do to secede, how assets will be divided etc? Because I'm starting to think the cartoon about trademarking "White House" so Trump doesn't declare his Florida residence "The People's White House" aren't far off the mark.

And frankly there should also be legislation to say how to kick a state out of the Union. 

Apparently section 3 of the 14th Amendment is specifically written to keep traitors out (post-Civil War - note, IANAL, nor an American historian so no idea - this is from a comment on the linked article) so asking for the legislators who have signed to be barred from sitting is apparently possible. Sounds good to me - also stop paying them. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Edited by Ozlsn
3, not 13
  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCOTUS slaps down TX lawsuit!

I’m out of booze from toasting how many times the menace has lost this election.
  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 19
  • Love 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supreme Court to Texas: Fuck you. 

Quote

(CNN)The Supreme Court rejected a bid from Texas' attorney general -- supported by President Donald Trump -- to block the ballots of millions of voters in battleground states that went in favor of President-elect Joe Biden.

The court's move to dismiss the challenge is the strongest indication yet that Trump has no chance of overturning election results in court that even the justices whom he placed there have no interest in allowing his desperate legal bids to continue.

The court did not provide a vote count, but there were no dissents to the order made public.

Separately, justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said they would have allowed the case to be filed, but would grant no other relief.

 

  • Upvote 10
  • Haha 1
  • Thank You 2
  • Love 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • GreyhoundFan locked this topic
  • GreyhoundFan unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.