Jump to content

It seems likely the texas case will be won.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Its hard to argue the four swing states didn't change the process without consulting electors which isn't constitutional.  I think the results  will be thrown out.

^^^^ Doesn't know or understand the issue of the case.   Typical dumbass liberal.  

Here is why it is important to fight now. So that in the future, our children will never, ever, have to experience the dirty, stinking, polluted, degradation of our democracy....... like we

23 minutes ago, kfools said:

Its hard to argue the four swing states didn't change the process without consulting electors which isn't constitutional. 

I think the results  will be thrown out.

This is an impossible hurdle to cross in time for it to make a difference. 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, kfools said:

Its hard to argue the four swing states didn't change the process without consulting electors which isn't constitutional. 

I think the results  will be thrown out.

What did I tell you about thinking?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

Has nothing to do with the suit, dumdum.

 

The CONSTITUTION has control and the actions of the defendants were unconstitutional. ALL states and ALL citizens have a stake in that. So shut up.

The Trump team throws in the towel on proving voter fraud

In the Texas voter id/voter suppression case, the state of Texas could provide no evidence of voter fraud and so the Texas voter id/voter suppresson law was largely gutted. In the Kansas proof of citizenship to register to vote case, Kobach could provide no proof of voter fraud despite putting several of of the members of trump's voter fraud task force on the stand as expert witnesses. Koback lost that case. The trump team has presented no evidence of voter fraud and now want to clam that voter fraud cannot be detected. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/10/trump-team-throws-towel-proving-voter-fraud/

The lawsuit does not claim evidence of fraud in the vote-tabulation process but rather says, “The public record demonstrates a ballot-counting process replete with chaos, confusion, and partisan bias.”

It also comes close to acknowledging that fraud has not conclusively been proved.

“Whatever doubt there is about fraud by voters or political operatives,” it says, “there is no doubt that the officials of the Defendant States changed the rules of the contest in an unauthorized manner.”
 
It’s certainly a novel legal strategy, but it’s also one that reflects the last-ditch nature of the effort. The Trump team has spent weeks asserting that it could prove fraud or has proved fraud. It hasn’t — and in many cases lawyers like Giuliani have been forced to admit in court that they aren’t alleging actual fraud in specific cases — so now the argument is that this is beside the point. The real point, it seems, is that fraud could have occurred but that we might never see it because elections officials made it that way.

“It is not necessary for the Plaintiff in Intervention to prove that fraud occurred, however,” the suit states, “it is only necessary to demonstrate that the elections in the defendant States materially deviated from the ‘manner’ of choosing electors established by their respective state Legislatures.”

In other words, it’s not saying that Trump definitely won; it’s just saying that supposedly illegal actions make it impossible to determine conclusively that Joe Biden did. And because of this, it apparently argues that Trump should remain president.

It’s not the first time the Trump team has watered down its claims of fraud when actually faced with vouching for them in legal proceedings, as noted above. But it’s certainly telling that it’s now proactively dispatching with that question and shifting its legal argument in a completely different direction. If this was truly what happened, after all, why spend weeks talking about evidence of fraud rather than that? The reason: It wanted to prove fraud, but it couldn’t. So now it’s doing this other thing.

In other words, trump can not prove voter fraud but wants to overturn the election because he is afraid of possible voter fraud.. this is a weak legal argument
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, calguy said:

The Trump team throws in the towel on proving voter fraud

In the Texas voter id/voter suppression case, the state of Texas could provide no evidence of voter fraud and so the Texas voter id/voter suppresson law was largely gutted. In the Kansas proof of citizenship to register to vote case, Kobach could provide no proof of voter fraud despite putting several of of the members of trump's voter fraud task force on the stand as expert witnesses. Koback lost that case. The trump team has presented no evidence of voter fraud and now want to clam that voter fraud cannot be detected. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/10/trump-team-throws-towel-proving-voter-fraud/

The lawsuit does not claim evidence of fraud in the vote-tabulation process but rather says, “The public record demonstrates a ballot-counting process replete with chaos, confusion, and partisan bias.”

It also comes close to acknowledging that fraud has not conclusively been proved.

“Whatever doubt there is about fraud by voters or political operatives,” it says, “there is no doubt that the officials of the Defendant States changed the rules of the contest in an unauthorized manner.”
 
It’s certainly a novel legal strategy, but it’s also one that reflects the last-ditch nature of the effort. The Trump team has spent weeks asserting that it could prove fraud or has proved fraud. It hasn’t — and in many cases lawyers like Giuliani have been forced to admit in court that they aren’t alleging actual fraud in specific cases — so now the argument is that this is beside the point. The real point, it seems, is that fraud could have occurred but that we might never see it because elections officials made it that way.

“It is not necessary for the Plaintiff in Intervention to prove that fraud occurred, however,” the suit states, “it is only necessary to demonstrate that the elections in the defendant States materially deviated from the ‘manner’ of choosing electors established by their respective state Legislatures.”

In other words, it’s not saying that Trump definitely won; it’s just saying that supposedly illegal actions make it impossible to determine conclusively that Joe Biden did. And because of this, it apparently argues that Trump should remain president.

It’s not the first time the Trump team has watered down its claims of fraud when actually faced with vouching for them in legal proceedings, as noted above. But it’s certainly telling that it’s now proactively dispatching with that question and shifting its legal argument in a completely different direction. If this was truly what happened, after all, why spend weeks talking about evidence of fraud rather than that? The reason: It wanted to prove fraud, but it couldn’t. So now it’s doing this other thing.

In other words, trump can not prove voter fraud but wants to overturn the election because he is afraid of possible voter fraud.. this is a weak legal argument

 

Again...this case is NOT about voter fraud.  Why can't liberals read?  There have been several threads about the issues on this case.

 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BatteryPowered said:

 

Again...this case is NOT about voter fraud.  Why can't liberals read?  There have been several threads about the issues on this case.

 

So there was no voter fraud?  .................What a concept.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, calguy said:

So there was no voter fraud?  .................What a concept.

 

Where did I say that?

 

I said this case is not about voter fraud.  Maybe you should leave the basement, go upstairs and have your Mommy read and explain the post to you.  Apparently you can't comprehend what is being posted on your own.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BatteryPowered said:

 

Where did I say that?

 

I said this case is not about voter fraud.  Maybe you should leave the basement, go upstairs and have your Mommy read and explain the post to you.  Apparently you can't comprehend what is being posted on your own.

 

The result doesn't change no matter what the fuck you say or said.

I predict that this week end all you cons will crying about how the SCOTUS "sold out" by rejecting this incredibly stuipd lawsuit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, calguy said:

The result doesn't change no matter what the fuck you say or said.

I predict that this week end all you cons will crying about how the SCOTUS "sold out" by rejecting this incredibly stuipd lawsuit.

 

If they reject the case, or accept it and rule against the plaintiffs, so be it.  I have real things in life to occupy my time, I don't worry about things I cannot influence or control.

 

  • Thumb up 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...