Jump to content
IGNORED

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


GreyhoundFan

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, onekidanddone said:

Well fuck nugget. Now what?

From what I learned in Twitter Law School, the first lawsuit was about everything and the kitchen sink but Rudy et al failed to appeal  the circuit court about most of the stuff it was rejected for. So they basically conceded that they don't have standing and that the remedies they were asking for are absurd.

The appeal is mostly just about whether Brann should have let them file a second amended complaint, and the circuit court judge listed various reasons it would have been futile because they would have lost . 

Jenna Ellis and Rudy are selling it as a win but it appears basically what they have left to appeal SC for is a chance to get SC to say Brann should hear the second amended complaint and then have it rejected for all the same reasons it was rejected originally that haven't changed in the appeal.

The Supreme Court may or may not take a case that is about giving the president another chance to be laughed out of court. 

EDIT i didn't notice it was acout Wisconsin SC, I was thinking about the PA appeal. 

But it's a bit hard to believe any court wants to be the first to toss out a stateful of legal votes because president had his feefees hurt is not a constitutional basis for rejecting an election result. 

 

 

Edited by AmazonGrace
  • Upvote 9
  • Thank You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

From what I learned in Twitter Law School, the first lawsuit was about everything and the kitchen sink but Rudy et al failed to appeal  the circuit court about most of the stuff it was rejected for. So they basically conceded that they don't have standing and that the remedies they were asking for are absurd.

The appeal is mostly just about whether Brann should have let them file a second amended complaint, and the circuit court judge listed various reasons it would have been futile because they would have lost . 

Jenna Ellis and Rudy are selling it as a win but it appears basically what they have left to appeal SC for is a chance to get SC to say Brann should hear the second amended complaint and then have it rejected for all the same reasons it was rejected originally that haven't changed in the appeal.

The Supreme Court may or may not take a case that is about giving the president another chance to be laughed out of court. 

EDIT i didn't notice it was acout Wisconsin SC, I was thinking about the PA appeal. 

But it's a bit hard to believe any court wants to be the first to toss out a stateful of legal votes because president had his feefees hurt is not a constitutional basis for rejecting an election result. 

 

 

There is something else that Trump and his coterie of idiots don’t realize about their chances in the SC, that has nothing to do with the law.

Trump isn’t the one who is responsible for packing the SC with three biased judges. He may believe they are loyal to him because he was the one who put forth their names, but he’s not the one they owe fealty to. I mean, you don’t think Trump actually knows Gorsuch or Kavanaugh or Coney? No, somebody whispered in Trump’s ear who to nominate, and they have been placed on the SC with one purpose only: to represent the evangelical right’s cause.

Edited by fraurosena
  • Upvote 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay the WI SC petition is easier to read than the Kraken and half the pages are blank, so. 

The petitioner is a dude who thinks ballot drop boxes are illegal and every vote places in them is illegally diluting his vote. He goes to some detail to explain that CISA, a program that Trump signed on in 2018, and where Chris Krebs was fired from for saying it was a secure election, promoted drop boxes, and he thinks this is treasonous activity. 

He says drop boxes were illegal because they are not specifically mentioned in WI election laws and because there "might" be voter fraud if somebody put in fraudulent ballots or retrieved ballots from boxes after the deadline. He is NOT saying he knows that anyone did so ,  but still he asks that all votes in the drop boxes should be rejected.

If impossible to tell which votes were in the boxes by now he wants a new election before December 14 (yeah right) or state legislature to choose electors. 

There is no word about any other races that were on those ballots, apparently he is just concerned about the presidential race.

But if the WI SC  deemed the drop boxes illegal for presidential votes why wouldn't they be illegal for any other stuff? And that would be a goddamned mess. You can't appoint electors for other things they voted for. (I am assuming)

 

 

Screenshot_20201128-092358.thumb.jpg.47e6538cad23a0e6c99d3c200c89348d.jpg

 

 

 

There does not seem to be a corresponding lower court action but the person is  appealing to the WI SC directly. 

Partly this seems like a Chris Krebs under the bus operation and what the hell this is about I don't know. (Not enough errors to be a message to Q?) 

Spoiler

Screenshot_20201128-085832.thumb.jpg.c3e48958ef1ba616e3d5ef5cb120b8d6.jpgScreenshot_20201128-090335.thumb.jpg.5c2760177af9022a6e05cdbace73f2dc.jpg

 

  • Upvote 7
  • Thank You 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

There is something else that Trump and his coterie of idiots don’t realize about their chances in the SC, that has nothing to do with the law.

Trump isn’t the one who is responsible for packing the SC with three biased judges. He may believe they are loyal to him because he was the one who put forth their names, but he’s not the one they owe fealty to. I mean, you don’t think Trump actually knows Gorsuch or Kavanaugh or Coney? No, somebody whispered in Trump’s ear who to nominate, and they have been placed on the SC with one purpose only: to represent the evangelical right’s cause.

Yeah and anyway if you want fealty you need some leverage and after putting someone in a lifetime position there's nothing much that you can either bribe or threaten them with so they can vote any way they want. Granted, they will often want things that will turn out badly , but not because  Trump can do anything for them anymore. What's he going to do if SC doesn't overturn the election? Whine on Twitter. 

Upthread there's some discussion that state Supreme Courts don't usually like being appealed to directly, bypassing the lower courts and the usual procedure for contesting an election.  

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

What's he going to do if SC doesn't overturn the election? Whine on Twitter. 

Fun part of that? Twitter will suspend his account really quickly after January 20. :562479b0cbc9f_whistle1: 

  • Upvote 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

 

Is this similar to the ‘hearing’ in Gettysburg?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2020 at 12:07 AM, fraurosena said:

Here’s a pic of the irresolute desk @thoughtful mentioned in her post:

Note that there is no pen...

That desk looks a lot my my piano bench.  And that this isn't photoshopped made my day!

12 hours ago, fraurosena said:

There is something else that Trump and his coterie of idiots don’t realize about their chances in the SC, that has nothing to do with the law.

Trump isn’t the one who is responsible for packing the SC with three biased judges. He may believe they are loyal to him because he was the one who put forth their names, but he’s not the one they owe fealty to. I mean, you don’t think Trump actually knows Gorsuch or Kavanaugh or Coney? No, somebody whispered in Trump’s ear who to nominate, and they have been placed on the SC with one purpose only: to represent the evangelical right’s cause.

Agree with the bolded.  The he fact that Coney is Catholic, a natural enemy of the evangelical right, just makes them even more hypocritical.

6 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Fun part of that? Twitter will suspend his account really quickly after January 20. :562479b0cbc9f_whistle1: 

I doubt it.  As long as he's driving traffic they will find a way to keep him around.  

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I doubt it.  As long as he's driving traffic they will find a way to keep him around.  

Well, apparently Twitter has said differently. 

Trump will no longer receive special Twitter treatment if he loses election

Quote

Donald Trump could lose more than just the presidency this January. Twitter has confirmed that, if Trump leaves office, he will no longer receive special treatment as a “newsworthy individual”.

Twitter’s policy around newsworthiness protects certain people – such as elected officials with more than 250,000 followers – from having their accounts suspended or banned for rule infractions that would otherwise lead to severe penalties.

That policy is what has led to the company muting, but not removing, at least 12 tweets from the US president over the past week that cast doubt on the democratic process.

But, Twitter has confirmed, the policy does not apply to former elected officials. They have to follow the same rules as everyone else, and if a tweet breaks those rules, it gets removed. Were Trump to continue breaking Twitter’s rules regularly post-presidency, his account could be suspended.

“Twitter’s approach to world leaders, candidates and public officials is based on the principle that people should be able to choose to see what their leaders are saying with clear context,” a spokesman told the Guardian. “This means that we may apply warnings and labels, and limit engagement to certain Tweets. This policy framework applies to current world leaders and candidates for office, and not private citizens when they no longer hold these positions.”

That will present Trump with a choice once he leaves office: either tone down the rhetoric or face the prospect of his hugely influential following being taken away from him.

[...]

They could be lying though.

  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, onekidanddone said:

Is this similar to the ‘hearing’ in Gettysburg?

Looks like it to me.

image.thumb.png.761de1d834b1fad840446a410d970b0b.png

The "signs and wonders" crowd is getting excited about the lunar eclipse on November 30th and the solar eclipse on December 14th, when the electors meet. They're telling themselves that these eclipses mean Trump will get a second term.

  • WTF 2
  • Haha 11
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Well, apparently Twitter has said differently. 

Trump will no longer receive special Twitter treatment if he loses election

They could be lying though.

Twitter’s Jack has been such a fucking coward when it comes to Fuckmuppet I wouldn’t trust him or Twitter to do the right thing.

But calling an election unfair does not make it so.“

Quote

The Trump campaign lost another battle Friday in their attempt to prove mass fraud in the election, something thus far they've been unable to do. This time, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied the campaign's request for an injunction in Pennsylvania to undo the Keystone State's certification of its votes.

Trump-appointed Judge Stephanos Bibas, who wrote the opinion for the three-judge panel, said the campaign's arguments have no merit. Pennsylvania certified its election results last week, and the federal government's General Services Administration has allowed for the formal transition process to take place. 

"Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here," Bibas wrote in his opinion. 

 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Cartmann99 said:

Looks like it to me.

image.thumb.png.761de1d834b1fad840446a410d970b0b.png

The "signs and wonders" crowd is getting excited about the lunar eclipse on November 30th and the solar eclipse on December 14th, when the electors meet. They're telling themselves that these eclipses mean Trump will get a second term.

Well Nov 30th Arizona has to have certified and confirmed Biden's win, Dec14th the electors meet and confirm Biden's win. Signs and wonders, who knew.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mitch McConnell must be ripping his hair out over Georgia:

 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this has always been how Trump’s WH works, but this still makes me go :pb_eek:

 

  • Upvote 6
  • Disgust 1
  • WTF 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caroline Giuliani is hilarious. 

Attention, Trumpworld: Self-Care Tips For Accepting The Reality That Trump Lost.

Quote

Commune with nature. Adequate gear is essential for outdoor adventures, so begin by packing up any and all belongings from the White House. Then trek into the wilderness until you lose cell service and Twitter will no longer refresh. Stay until America is back on track. This may take anywhere from eight years to forever.

BreatheAs a devoted yogi and longtime breather, I recommend inhaling for two months—the length of time that Donald Trump once suggested the coronavirus would last—and exhaling for 16 years, the average length of a Supreme Court justice appointment. (Hold for an extra count for each morally bereft sitting justice.) To save lives, breathing exercises in public should be performed while wearing a mask. (Which is, by the way, neither difficult nor oppressive to this activity, never mind to your own existence.)

Adopt a stray. Please, just treat it better than Trump has treated his lapdogs: William Barr, Ted Cruz, and Lindsey Graham.

Engage with your surroundings. It’s time for a redesign! Demolish remaining Confederate statues and consider replacing them with busts of Dolly Parton and John Lewis. For outdoor architectural projects, I recommend Four Seasons Total Landscaping. (Get a jump on your holiday shopping at the literary establishment next door.) Sexual self-care is critical if you don’t want to end up in the crematorium across the street. This is not a sponsored ad. But it could be! Call me, Fantasy Island.

Practice a new skill. Knitting, Reiki, capoeira, even building imaginary walls—there are so many enriching possibilities. (Please note that whining, lying, and grabbing women by the pussy are not skills.)

Go on a silent retreat. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. And then shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh some more. When you think it’s finally time to talk, it’s not. I’m speaking.

Take stock of your failures. Only sociopathic narcissists have delusions of grandeur, blaming others for their failings, often with tragic consequences. And you’re not a sociopathic narcissist, right? To be sure, meditate on how losing an election can be an opportunity for growth.

Bake. We’ve heard a lot about sourdough starters, but there are a million other recipes to learn once you accept that numbers are the basis of all measurement systems. If you start toggling the ratio of yeast to salt because yeast got more votes and you’re a salty sore loser, your oven will explode.

Sweat it out. TikTok choreography is a legitimate workout, but under no circumstances should you dance like you’re pleasuring a ghost. Instead, march for social justice. There’s no shortage of groups that are striving to dismantle centuries of systemic oppression, a cruelty compounded by the last four years. #BlackLivesMatter #ToppleThePatriarchy #LoveIsLove.

Invest in skin care. After you work it out physically and mentally, it’s time for a cleansing routine! Avoid charcoal products or anything with artificial dyes, which may result in your face oozing as you make false claims of voter fraud in Philadelphia, for example. Opt for an exfoliating scrub—Coup D’état Be Gone is a popular one—to wash away any lingering desire to subvert the will of the people.

Call your friends and family. Connect with the people in your life who prioritize science, empathy, and facts. Or at least stop ignoring your relatives who just want you to allow the democratic process to unfold unobstructed. (Artsy daughters are especially insightful.)

 

  • Upvote 13
  • Love 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/2020 at 1:20 AM, fraurosena said:

and they have been placed on the SC with one purpose only: to represent the evangelical right’s cause.

To clarify, Protestant evangelicals AND Catholic fundamentalists, who can actually be even worse.  My sense is that the real Deep State is a far right-wing Catholic operation in DC, i.e., Federalist Society, Leonard Leo, with a little help from Opus Dei who know how to play Protestant evangelicals.  Also see: twice divorced Newt Gingrich, whose mistress now wife (also divorced) is ambassador to the Holy See. 

John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Covid Barrett are all conservative to right-wing, fundamentalist Catholics. 

Clarence Thomas' wife (she of the infamous middle-of-the-night drunk dial to Anita Hill) is a right wing activist and general a**.   Samuel Alito gave a speech recently that leaves no question that he is right wing and proud of it. 

Sonia Sotomayor is a liberal Catholic/Democrat. 

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

Caroline Giuliani is hilarious. 

She is indeed! 

 

Edited by Howl
  • Upvote 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, fraurosena said:

This is wonderful!  Thanks for posting that!

20 hours ago, fraurosena said:

Well, apparently Twitter has said differently. 

Trump will no longer receive special Twitter treatment if he loses election

They could be lying though.

Oh, I know what they said...but once again I'm going to rely on your optimism and not my cynical nature :) 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

I keep seeing how Trump won either 1 or 2 of these elections. Out of curiosity I tried to find what he actually won and literally could only find is losses. Does anyone know what he won?

Edited by front hugs > duggs
election lawsuits* not elections
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee, there's a topic on which Perdue and I agree -- I never wanted him to be in politics.

 

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, front hugs > duggs said:

I keep seeing how Trump won either 1 or 2 of these elections. Out of curiosity I tried to find what he actually won and literally could only find is losses. Does anyone know what he won?

The one he won involved a deadline for something-or-other to do with the ballots in Pennsylvania. No longer terribly relevant.

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/pennsylvania-supreme-court-reverses-one-of-trumps-only-post-election-litigation-wins/

This story explains how he got from two victories back to one.

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/602-MD-20.pdf

this is counted as the win I think.

  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 3
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.