(12-08-2020 10:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious. Why didn't they sue all the states, rather then just the four of the five trump had flipped on him because he was a failure?

Nevermind, we all know.

Lower taxes, lower gas prices, higher paying jobs, record high employment levels, record high stock markets, highest black home ownership levels, no new wars started, peace agreements in the middle east, lower flow of illegals invading the country, stronger NATO, China not building new islands and taking over international waters, Russia not invading parts of Ukraine and taking that over, removing ISIS lands they took over, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., ........ you mean that kind of failure.

The truth is - Old Joe would be considered a huge success by the media and his cult followers if he were able to accomplish just one or two of those things.

(12-08-2020 08:20 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  God Bless Texas.
It's the 2020 version of the Alamo.

Here, here!

(12-08-2020 11:35 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious. Why didn't they sue all the states, rather then just the four of the five trump had flipped on him because he was a failure?

Nevermind, we all know.

Lower taxes, lower gas prices, higher paying jobs, record high employment levels, record high stock markets, highest black home ownership levels, no new wars started, peace agreements in the middle east, lower flow of illegals invading the country, stronger NATO, China not building new islands and taking over international waters, Russia not invading parts of Ukraine and taking that over, removing ISIS lands they took over, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., ........ you mean that kind of failure.

The truth is - Old Joe would be considered a huge success by the media and his cult followers if he were able to accomplish just one or two of those things.

if 1 = only one, then 1 = scoop

if 1 = two, then 1 = 2 scoops

if 1 = two+, then 1 = a cherry placed on top and popped
-------

if 1/then 1 = true (logic)

(12-08-2020 10:31 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:07 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What a laughable, subjective filing.
“Democrat voters” receiving more favorable treatment”... how is that to be determined?

“The appearance of voting irregularities”... a claim that has been consistently disproven, oft-times “with prejudice”, by lower courts

This filing is nothing more than a Trump stump speech written in legalese; so no, it will not be taken up by the SCOTUS.

Legally it has nothing to do with the party of the voters.

In some states, some counties contacted voters with incomplete information on a mail-in ballot to help them complete their ballot. In other counties in the same state, that was not done. The lawsuit contends the voters did not receive equal protection under the law because of the differing procedures.

That contention, from a legal standpoint, has nothing to do with the party of the voter.

From the filing...

• Intrastate differences in the treatment of voters, with more favorable allotted to voters – whether lawful or unlawful – in areas administered by local government under Democrat control and with populations with higher ratios of Democrat voters than other areas of Defendant States.
• The appearance of voting irregularities in the Defendant States that would be consistent with the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot-integrity protections in those States’ election laws.

(12-08-2020 10:48 AM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:31 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:07 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What a laughable, subjective filing.
“Democrat voters” receiving more favorable treatment”... how is that to be determined?

“The appearance of voting irregularities”... a claim that has been consistently disproven, oft-times “with prejudice”, by lower courts

This filing is nothing more than a Trump stump speech written in legalese; so no, it will not be taken up by the SCOTUS.

Legally it has nothing to do with the party of the voters.

In some states, some counties contacted voters with incomplete information on a mail-in ballot to help them complete their ballot. In other counties in the same state, that was not done. The lawsuit contends the voters did not receive equal protection under the law because of the differing procedures.

That contention, from a legal standpoint, has nothing to do with the party of the voter.

Shouldn't the fight then be against the county officials that didn't bother to help folks correct their ballot rather than throw out the votes of citizens who did nothing wrong?

How do YOU know they did nothing wrong?

(12-08-2020 11:52 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:48 AM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:31 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:07 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What a laughable, subjective filing.
“Democrat voters” receiving more favorable treatment”... how is that to be determined?

“The appearance of voting irregularities”... a claim that has been consistently disproven, oft-times “with prejudice”, by lower courts

This filing is nothing more than a Trump stump speech written in legalese; so no, it will not be taken up by the SCOTUS.

Legally it has nothing to do with the party of the voters.

In some states, some counties contacted voters with incomplete information on a mail-in ballot to help them complete their ballot. In other counties in the same state, that was not done. The lawsuit contends the voters did not receive equal protection under the law because of the differing procedures.

That contention, from a legal standpoint, has nothing to do with the party of the voter.

Shouldn't the fight then be against the county officials that didn't bother to help folks correct their ballot rather than throw out the votes of citizens who did nothing wrong?

How do YOU know they did nothing wrong?

Also, if they did nothing wrong their ballots would not need to be corrected.

(12-08-2020 11:55 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:52 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:48 AM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:31 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:07 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  What a laughable, subjective filing.
“Democrat voters” receiving more favorable treatment”... how is that to be determined?

“The appearance of voting irregularities”... a claim that has been consistently disproven, oft-times “with prejudice”, by lower courts

This filing is nothing more than a Trump stump speech written in legalese; so no, it will not be taken up by the SCOTUS.

Legally it has nothing to do with the party of the voters.

In some states, some counties contacted voters with incomplete information on a mail-in ballot to help them complete their ballot. In other counties in the same state, that was not done. The lawsuit contends the voters did not receive equal protection under the law because of the differing procedures.

That contention, from a legal standpoint, has nothing to do with the party of the voter.

Shouldn't the fight then be against the county officials that didn't bother to help folks correct their ballot rather than throw out the votes of citizens who did nothing wrong?

How do YOU know they did nothing wrong?

Also, if they did nothing wrong their ballots would not need to be corrected.

Holy shite you two, fine. Citizens who did nothing ILLEGAL.

(12-08-2020 12:01 PM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:55 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:52 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:48 AM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:31 AM)Claw Wrote:  Legally it has nothing to do with the party of the voters.

In some states, some counties contacted voters with incomplete information on a mail-in ballot to help them complete their ballot. In other counties in the same state, that was not done. The lawsuit contends the voters did not receive equal protection under the law because of the differing procedures.

That contention, from a legal standpoint, has nothing to do with the party of the voter.

Shouldn't the fight then be against the county officials that didn't bother to help folks correct their ballot rather than throw out the votes of citizens who did nothing wrong?

How do YOU know they did nothing wrong?

Also, if they did nothing wrong their ballots would not need to be corrected.

Holy shite you two, fine. Citizens who did nothing ILLEGAL.

Maybe they submitted an invalid ballot by mistake. Maybe they did it on purpose, in which case that might BE ILLEGAL.

(12-08-2020 12:03 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 12:01 PM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:55 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:52 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 10:48 AM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  Shouldn't the fight then be against the county officials that didn't bother to help folks correct their ballot rather than throw out the votes of citizens who did nothing wrong?

How do YOU know they did nothing wrong?

Also, if they did nothing wrong their ballots would not need to be corrected.

Holy shite you two, fine. Citizens who did nothing ILLEGAL.

Maybe they submitted an invalid ballot by mistake. Maybe they did it on purpose, in which case that might BE ILLEGAL.

The Trump legal team has had open access to the courts to defend these claims, and each time they have failed to back up their accusations. Anyone can post an out of context video or make a “truthy” claim, but those must ultimately be proven in a court and under oath. I have no doubt true believers can be whipped into fury with propaganda but, thankfully, we still have a court system that demands those claims be substantiated.

Since the Texas AG is under indictment for securities fraud, and was accused by his own staffers of bribery in Oct, what are the chances that this suit is just him posturing for a pardon by trump?

(12-08-2020 12:31 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Since the Texas AG is under indictment for securities fraud, and was accused by his own staffers of bribery in Oct, what are the chances that this suit is just him posturing for a pardon by trump?

You can’t get through the first 4 pages of the filing without recognizing the lawsuit for what it is... a politically partisan document meant to endear the AG & signatories to Trump not to mount a serious legal challenge.

It is a pretty detailed and well-written Bill of Complaint.
For me, the major argument has more to do with the individual Defendant States Changing their Electoral Laws without the Constitutionally required Legislative approval. Once those things were "allowed" by each of the States, it opened everything up to a free-for-all where almost anything goes--and it did, most especially in these States, lead directly to multiple hundreds of cases of various types of election irregularities and election Fraud.
I found it interesting that the State of Texas actually asked for what I believe is the correct remedy in their request: To "Enjoin Defendant States’ use of the 2020 election results for the Office of President to appoint presidential electors to the Electoral College and authorize, pursuant to the Court’s remedial authority, the Defendant States to conduct a special election to appoint presidential electors." In other words, a proper do-over election for the office of president of the United States (and V.P.)

The nice thing about that is that we could openly monitor it, ensure their were proper ballot and voter eligibility and ID procedures followed this time (unlike the fake election Nov 3rd 'election') and have a separate ballot pool to directly compare with the first, fraud-tainted and compromised one. This would have the positive effect of showing the voters that their votes are indeed taken seriously and secured, unlike what happened on the previous 'election.'

I wondered what the Citizens of 1876 would have thought, and what those Democrats of Tilden would have been jealously slobbering over the fact that in our more modern time we had so many more ways to cheat available than they did? Of course, that election, corrupt as it was, eventually went to the Republican winner. More than 100 years later, democrats show they are even worse cheaters than ever. Guess we'll look for the same result as in 1876. Here's to your Second term, President Trump. Now, get the rest of that Wall built (and repeal and replace 0bissmal'care.' Finally, F*(% China, and here's a nice jail cell for ya'll, Nancy Joe, Hunter and Hilliary!

The claims against the Texas AG appear to be politically motivated. I don't have any idea whether any of them will stick or not.

As far as the election lawsuits, they are all barking up the wrong tree and doing so way too late to do any good.

(12-08-2020 12:23 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 12:03 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 12:01 PM)Bearcat419 Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:55 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(12-08-2020 11:52 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  How do YOU know they did nothing wrong?

Also, if they did nothing wrong their ballots would not need to be corrected.

Holy shite you two, fine. Citizens who did nothing ILLEGAL.

Maybe they submitted an invalid ballot by mistake. Maybe they did it on purpose, in which case that might BE ILLEGAL.

The Trump legal team has had open access to the courts to defend these claims, and each time they have failed to back up their accusations. Anyone can post an out of context video or make a “truthy” claim, but those must ultimately be proven in a court and under oath. I have no doubt true believers can be whipped into fury with propaganda but, thankfully, we still have a court system that demands those claims be substantiated.

None of these cases has been HEARD. NONE have all been dismissed on the merits that I am aware of--because none have actually been heard.

(12-08-2020 01:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The claims against the Texas AG appear to be politically motivated. I don't have any idea whether any of them will stick or not.

As far as the election lawsuits, they are all barking up the wrong tree and doing so way too late to do any good.

to the latter(s), I need more info 'if = 1'...

in argumentative/subversive logic I'll go out on a limb and state, your first para >>> 2nd para...

that's why you vote 3rd party w/0 backing...

w/o merit in para 2, all I 'hear' is theatrical + rhetorical...it’s why you respond to the goons with an expectation level relative to =
...

(12-08-2020 01:11 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  As far as the election lawsuits, they are all barking up the wrong tree and doing so way too late to do any good.

That depends on what they're trying to do. Reports are that team trump has spent around 30 million dollars on the legal work while they have raised over 200 million dollars.

As with everything related to trump, follow the money.

I feel for the sad saps that have donated thinking they're going to change the election.

Equal protection. It happened in 2000.

Texas have no say so to file a false filing of fraud since their state was not involved in the voting. We know how bad illegally Texas suppress the votes in the counties around Houston. Not allowing safe drop boxes with officials from SOS watching in more than one places. People have to drive over an hour to drop off their early absentee ballot site.

(12-08-2020 01:38 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote:  Equal protection. It happened in 2000.

how soon they forget the difference of 2 decades of isolated tech improvement....

SCOTUS = LEGACY PLATEFUL