Trump and 17 states back Texas bid to undo his election loss at Supreme Court

[J Town]

10 minutes ago, mtraveler said:

 

Maybe I'm just dreaming, but if the question of the election is decided by the Supreme Court, with 1/3 of the Justices having been selected by Trump, perhaps that will put an end to things.  Knowing that the Supreme Court is the last stop on the line, any and all evidence and proof of fraud would need to be presented at that time.  Maybe the rendering of a decision by the top court in the land will create some finality.  

 

Like I said, maybe I'm just dreaming...

GAWD this is getting annoying. IF there had been ANY evidence, it would have been presented by now. Just cuz things didn't go how 45 supporters wanted doesn't change reality.

[bendejo]

3 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Typical rant from the alt right.  Claiming Dems are "radical liberals" or communists.  But if we say something like that about Trump's supporters, you get upset.  Claim we're attacking you.  Right....

 

It's OK to support Trump.  Just admit to his many issues.  Telling porkies is the biggest one.

 

I wish the Dems had the wherewithal and guile to be able to do half the things the GOP-ers accuse them of.  All this stuff that guys like Rush come out with is, in a way, flattering. 

 

But it's the fear machine that propels the nutty right (I would have phrased that as fringe right in 2006, but the GOP has moved to the cliff-edge). 

E.g. fear that the gov't is going to force men to "gay marry" if same-sex marriage is legalized, fear of Sharia law being enacted in the US.

And there's plenty of $$$ to be collected in this, just ask Glen Beck, Alex Jones, Rush, etc.  And now DT is getting it sent right into his pocket, no more fraudulent universities, re-labled steaks, cheap wine, et al.  Maybe his next move will be ministry.

 

 

[RocketDog]

12 hours ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

not really.  you're permitted to write in anything you wish, but i believe (google will give you an exact number) most states simply discard the write ins.

 

as to other candidates, they are generally wasted votes.  the uniparty controls access and has the power.  voting for a third party will definitely NOT result in a win for that candidate, however it might drain off support from one of the two uniparty swamp creatures, such that the greater of the two evils wins.

Yes. Correct. But I was replying directly to another comment stating only two candidates. That is incorrect. The Libertarian party always receives a portion of the vote. That is a fact. 

 

I don't think these minor candidates really drain votes. The people who vote for them typically will not vote for the major parties in any event. They are making a statement. 

[cmarshall]

14 minutes ago, mtraveler said:

 

Maybe I'm just dreaming, but if the question of the election is decided by the Supreme Court, with 1/3 of the Justices having been selected by Trump, perhaps that will put an end to things.  Knowing that the Supreme Court is the last stop on the line, any and all evidence and proof of fraud would need to be presented at that time.  Maybe the rendering of a decision by the top court in the land will create some finality.  

 

Like I said, maybe I'm just dreaming...

 

The US Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to decide elections.  Of course, they can and have seized upon ancillary points of law relating to an election to effect a judiciary coup, as in 2000.

[Chomper Higgot]

Paxton, who is the architect of this nonsense is in trouble:

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/10/subpoenas-served-ken-paxton-case/3886834001/

 

Perhaps he’s hoping for a pardon.

[RJRS1301]

5 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Maybe his next move will be ministry.

 

Well parts of the "evangelical" cults are supporting him, so he could stand for rippoff guru in chief (no election of course, because if he was not appointed he would have to sue all the happy clappers). He could then marry a Tammy Faye look alike

 

[bendejo]

15 minutes ago, mtraveler said:

 

Maybe I'm just dreaming, but if the question of the election is decided by the Supreme Court, with 1/3 of the Justices having been selected by Trump, perhaps that will put an end to things.  Knowing that the Supreme Court is the last stop on the line, any and all evidence and proof of fraud would need to be presented at that time.  Maybe the rendering of a decision by the top court in the land will create some finality.  

 

Like I said, maybe I'm just dreaming...

 

No, SCOTUS did not give it the dignity of being accepted as a valid case.  I believe they will maintain this position.  Roberts is well aware of the influences of the 3 stooges, and that Thomas/Alito is a 2-vote bloc, and does not want his name to be in the history books as his court facilitating the first electoral coup.

 

 

[RocketDog]

8 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

I really have no clue about American ballot papers really, BUT, it seems pretty obvious that no 3rd party appears to winning any seats. You could have 100 parties with no chance against the 'big 2' - that is more my point.

 

Least in the UK we have at least some non-big 2 on the ballot that win and create the occasional coalitional government  - can you please name me one president of the non big 2 since 1853 or the last coalition government in the last 100 years ? US politics to me seems stale.

OK. I agree. You should have been more specific. What you stated was incorrect. I merely corrected you. 

 

Your point is taken though. American politics is stagnant, polarized, corrupt, gridlocked, and ineffective. In short its broken. Trump was only elected because of that and all he's done is pเรร on the whole process. I see no way out of a political crisis in my country. I left USA a few days after trump was elected, and have grown roots in Thailand; hardly a coincidence. The virus, polarized politics, divisiveness, bigotry, and debt are destroying the America I grew up in. 

 

Of course two parties dominate USA politics, and that's not good, but multiple runoff and splintered parties have their own downsides.

There is such a thing as voter fatigue which would actually make the process less democratic. Working folks don't have the time or energy to devote 20% of their time to politics. 

[xylophone]

5 hours ago, looking on the bright side said:

In the first place this situation has  been created by the anti-Trump tribe which couldn't accept he was duly elected in 2016, and his presidency has been sabotaged  relentlessly

I don't know about his presidency being sabotaged relentlessly, but I do know that his constant and persistent lying, his frequent personal attacks, especially on John McCain and the disabled reporter, and his inability to be able to read and speak in ways above a low grade schoolboy, have put him offside with many people, including foreign leaders.

 

I would imagine the death toll of over 280,000 people due to the virus, when he has become famous for such quotes as, "we have it under control it's just a few cases" or "it's just like the flu and it will go come April", won't have endeared him to many folk, nor the fact that he seems to have racist leanings.

 

I could go on, but what's the point, it's all out there for everyone to see that the guy is unfit to be president of a nursery school, let alone of the USA.

 

He has been the architect of his own demise and has sabotaged his own term, so don't blame other folks for his shortcomings and lack of intelligence.

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You omitted to put "in my opinion" as that's all it is, and the SCOTUS is the highest court so till it rules the doubt will always remain.

Most of us know that courts get it wrong sometimes, which is why there is a SCOTUS.

Its not an opinion, its fact. Trumps fraud allegations on this are the same scotus heard in the Pa case which was emphatically denied.

 

States have a right to conduct their own elections and other states have no standing to make a complaint against another. Thats fact.

 

There is also no remedy because they have already certified.

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, RocketDog said:

Yes. Correct. But I was replying directly to another comment stating only two candidates. That is incorrect. The Libertarian party always receives a portion of the vote. That is a fact. 

 

I don't think these minor candidates really drain votes. The people who vote for them typically will not vote for the major parties in any event. They are making a statement. 

 

After getting all the campaign flack from the 2 parties, it's always a refreshing surprise to see the actual ballot and find people and entities you never heard of, but I guess I've lived in more "open minded" states.  There's usually at least 2 with words like communist, worker, socialist, peoples', etc.  Never hear of these otherwise.  Used to be a guy named Gus Hall, he ran as US presidential candidate for US Communist Party a bunch of times, once with Angela Davis as his VP.  Pat Buchanan gets on state ballots now and then, I guess it justifies accepting $$$. 

But now with someone openly "low-IQ-anon" in Congress the bus from the asylum officially reaches DC.  On the positive side, perhaps there will be a blue state rift where lunatics distance themselves from the normal GOP (cough-cough) and split the vote.

 

 

[Tie Dye Samurai]

17 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Its not an opinion, its fact. Trumps fraud allegations on this are the same scotus heard in the Pa case which was emphatically denied.

 

States have a right to conduct their own elections and other states have no standing to make a complaint against another. Thats fact.

 

There is also no remedy because they have already certified.

Well the ironic thing about this is that, the state that is running this lawsuit, because supposedly they don't like the way other states have conducted their elections, is the exact same state that had one mail in drop box for each county in the state....Texas has FOUR of the top 20 most populous counties in the country. How many other states do you think agreed with that policy? Yet Texas did not get sued for pulling that stunt to suppress their vote because it was not the business of Oklahoma or Oregon how Texas conducted its elections. 

 

History is not going to be kind to Trump, MAGA and probably most importantly the G.O.P....Trump lost this election badly....This was not the country embracing Biden....this was over 80 million people saying No to Donald Trump.

[moogradod]

Obvious case and many comments here on TV.

 

WHEN will we hear significant news from SCOTUS or even - a ruling and therefore an end (?) to this comedy ?

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, xylophone said:

I could go on, but what's the point, it's all out there for everyone to see

...but not on Fox News.

I see the articles "why do 75% of Republicans refuse to believe Biden won?" and the answer is, to express in Lewis Black style "BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ON THE NEWS THEY WATCH KEEPING SAYING SO, A__HOLE!!"

 

 

 

[Eric Loh]

3 minutes ago, moogradod said:

Obvious case and many comments here on TV.

 

WHEN will we hear significant news from SCOTUS or even - a ruling and therefore an end (?) to this comedy ?

The case is so frivolous that we can expect a court ruling by tomorrow or next couple of days at the latest. But doubt it will end the comedy. The clowns are still hard at work sniffing at any morsel of possibility that they can overturn the wishes of the people and the constitution. 

 

[Sujo]

9 minutes ago, moogradod said:

Obvious case and many comments here on TV.

 

WHEN will we hear significant news from SCOTUS or even - a ruling and therefore an end (?) to this comedy ?

Filings were told to be complete by friday. Scotus will probably give a ruling by monday.

 

its a very simple matter so not long.

Edited December 11, 2020 by Sujo

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

18 hours ago, Mavideol said:

Ted Cruz was asked by Trump to present the case to the Supreme Court, now let's see what the "double face jerk" has to say, hope he will repeat what he said back in 2016...... 555 ????????????

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ted-cruz-what-i-really-think-of-donald-trump/

Ted Cruz: "What I really think of Donald Trump"

By Rebecca Shabad  Updated on: May 3, 2016 / 2:29 PM / CBS News

I'm going to tell you what I really think of Donald Trump," Cruz said. "This man is a pathological liar. He doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. He lies practically every word that comes out of his mouth." And Cruz added, "The man is utterly amoral. Morality does not exist for him.

 

Yep, a "pathological liar" that Cruz has pretty much then supported and enabled throughout the sordid duration of Trump's presidency.  What does that say about the hypocrisy of Cruz and Republicans like him in the Senate?

 

Quote

"The man is utterly amoral. Morality does not exist for him.

 

On full display even as we speak...

 

[Berkshire]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Filings were told to be complete by friday. Scotus will probably give a ruling by monday.

 

its a very simple matter so not long.

The Electoral College will meet/vote Monday.  Since this nutty case is aimed at stopping that vote, I'd guess the SC will render their decision before that.

[cmarshall]

6 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

The Electoral College will meet/vote Monday.  Since this nutty case is aimed at stopping that vote, I'd guess the SC will render their decision before that.

Nope.  Monday will not be the end.  Despite what you have been reading about the finality of Dec. 8 or the finality of Dec. 14, the real final day is Jan 5 when Congress accepts and certifies the electoral votes from each state.  Only at that point is the new president elected. 

 

On Jan 5. the EV count from any state can be challenged if one senator and one congressman decide to challenge it.  At that point the House and the Senate meet separately and vote to accept or reject the vote count in question.  If both Houses accept that count, then it is added into the total for whichever candidate won.  If both Houses reject it, then those votes are not counted at all.  If one House accepts it and the other House rejects it, there is no procedure to resolve the discrepancy.  Such a split outcome can result in reducing the total number of EVs counted and can even result in neither candidate getting a majority, which is what happened in 1876.  In that case the House elects the president with one vote per state at which point the coup is complete and Trump is re-elected.

 

This is the ridiculous mess that the Constitution dumps us into.

 

We understand that several R congressman and at least one R senator, Ron Johnson, are planning on doing just this.  So this scenario is possible on Jan. 5.

[bendejo]

20 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

The Electoral College will meet/vote Monday.  Since this nutty case is aimed at stopping that vote, I'd guess the SC will render their decision before that.

Or not respond at all.  When approached on Tuesday about a decision Roberts says "You mean that was real?  We thought it was one of the clerks playing a prank!"

 

Cruz is angling to inherit DT's base, and they're stupid enough to fall in line.

 

 

[RJRS1301]

1 hour ago, moogradod said:

Obvious case and many comments here on TV.

 

WHEN will we hear significant news from SCOTUS or even - a ruling and therefore an end (?) to this comedy ?

I do not think it is a comedy, except a comedy of errors, more a bloody tragedy, for the courts and those who value non authoritarian claptrap

Edited December 11, 2020 by RJRS1301

[dundas]

7 hours ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

Trump is a sore loser, and about Texas, well several Texas sized states can fit into the 

the state of Alaska with room to spare.  Won't we all be so glad when Trump and

his followers all go into the swamp.

Geezer

Wade out of the swamp, I'd say. 

[moogradod]

30 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

......neither candidate getting a majority, which is what happened in 1876.  In that case the House elects the president with one vote per state at which point the coup is complete and Trump is re-elected.

 

This is the ridiculous mess that the Constitution dumps us into.

 

We understand that several R congressman and at least one R senator, Ron Johnson, are planning on doing just this.  So this scenario is possible on Jan. 5.

Yipee-ay-ee USA ! Back 144 years ! If this happens I would love to see major international partners break diplomatic ties. Like it would happen with North Korea etc. since the US would join them in the "may not be trusted" club. And all under the protection of the scotus since it would be perfectly constitutional. How ridiculous.

[Sujo]

57 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Nope.  Monday will not be the end.  Despite what you have been reading about the finality of Dec. 8 or the finality of Dec. 14, the real final day is Jan 5 when Congress accepts and certifies the electoral votes from each state.  Only at that point is the new president elected. 

 

On Jan 5. the EV count from any state can be challenged if one senator and one congressman decide to challenge it.  At that point the House and the Senate meet separately and vote to accept or reject the vote count in question.  If both Houses accept that count, then it is added into the total for whichever candidate won.  If both Houses reject it, then those votes are not counted at all.  If one House accepts it and the other House rejects it, there is no procedure to resolve the discrepancy.  Such a split outcome can result in reducing the total number of EVs counted and can even result in neither candidate getting a majority, which is what happened in 1876.  In that case the House elects the president with one vote per state at which point the coup is complete and Trump is re-elected.

 

This is the ridiculous mess that the Constitution dumps us into.

 

We understand that several R congressman and at least one R senator, Ron Johnson, are planning on doing just this.  So this scenario is possible on Jan. 5.

After all the court cases that are lost i doubt even the repubs would be dumb enough to do that, that would cause untold violence from millions of disenfranchised voters, and rightly so.

[ChouDoufu]

3 hours ago, RocketDog said:

Yes. Correct. But I was replying directly to another comment stating only two candidates. That is incorrect. The Libertarian party always receives a portion of the vote. That is a fact. 

 

I don't think these minor candidates really drain votes. The people who vote for them typically will not vote for the major parties in any event. They are making a statement. 

 

sure, they can make a statement by throwing away their vote.  3rd parties always get some votes.  the american communist party, the nazi party, the reform party, the tea party, the free beer party.....they all get a few votes.

 

my comment was to 3rd party candidates occasionally having enough support to drain votes from one of the uniparty candidates potentially causing a loss..... see perot and nader.

 

https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States

 

just imagine having multiple parties in the current environment -- which nutcases could the trump party form a coalition with!!

[moogradod]

7 minutes ago, Sujo said:

After all the court cases that are lost i doubt even the repubs would be dumb enough to do that, that would cause untold violence from millions of disenfranchised voters, and rightly so.

I hope you are right - but don't forget that 72 Million voters were dumb enough to vote for DT. So I would not bet my last Baht on the sound mind of any republican either.

[RJRS1301]

Just now, moogradod said:

I hope you are right - but don't forget that 72 Million voters were dumb enough to vote for DT. So I would not bet my last Baht on the sound mind of any republican either.

I wonder how many of those 72 million, were voting against Biden as opposed to wanting trump to carry the vote?

 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

I wonder how many of those 72 million, were voting against Biden as opposed to wanting trump to carry the vote?

 

Not very many. 

[heybruce]

14 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

sure, they can make a statement by throwing away their vote.  3rd parties always get some votes.  the american communist party, the nazi party, the reform party, the tea party, the free beer party.....they all get a few votes.

 

my comment was to 3rd party candidates occasionally having enough support to drain votes from one of the uniparty candidates potentially causing a loss..... see perot and nader.

 

https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States

 

just imagine having multiple parties in the current environment -- which nutcases could the trump party form a coalition with!!

That is one of the arguments for Rank Choice Voting, aka Rank Preference Voting.

[J Town]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

6 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

I wonder how many of those 72 million, were voting against Biden as opposed to wanting trump to carry the vote?

 

Not very many. 

Seeing multitudes of delusional groups not wearing masks cuz their idiot leader told them it was all a hoax supports the premise that 45's voters were absolutely behind him. Their passion is enviable. Just too bad they couldn't focus that energy towards truth.