2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Great Chandler said:
May haps, but no one will forget the messy results of this election. The fallout will remain as the Biden administration begins. As for Trump, he'll just be a thorn on their boots as they march into a forest of many thorns, grown by the mistrust of disgruntled voters.
Click to expand...
Doubt it. 2016 people decried more thorough investigations into voting, precautions and more. 2020 rolls around and ... Jack squat. Gold fish syndrome strikes again.
 
jje100010001 said:
The real problem with the SCOTUS is its implications onto future federal electoral cases IMO, and the fact that it's left the whole PA-MI-WI-GA situation unresolved. The question now is if the country really has a procedural mechanism to deal with this, or if it'll essentially have to require the equivalent of sticking one's hand into the machine to fix.
Click to expand...
I think the machine is breaking down to be honest. No one is going to trust election results after this and the implications of that are dire.

Jarolleon said:
Maybe a small hard core of them will always remember it, and it'll because a piece of right-wing deep lore like the 1960 election being rigged.
Click to expand...
Good luck with that.

Here's Gorka at the DC march (.aac file)

Also, Rudy came on Bannon's show and he and Bannon both pushed for Special Prosecutors into Election Fraud and the Biden Crime Family™ ties to China.

Also, there are still lawsuits in all states in PAGAMIWI.

I think the Trump crowd is going to keep fighting right up to the inauguration and most likely beyond it. It'll be like Trump's election in 2016 where there were constant attempts to bring him down, impeachment, special prosecutors, demonstrations and so on from his opponents. Who were about half the country. That run continuously from 2016 to the 2020 election.

It's the circle of life!

Incidentally one of the things that Academic Agent speculated on was that post SCOTUS loss 'we'll be hearing more and more about Biden's ties to China and that the end result will be that he will not become POTUS.

If he does I think the Republicans should greet his ascension to power with all the grace the Democrats greeted Trump's in 2016, aka constant guerilla lawfare and agitprop until he leaves office.

As AA put it 'Never bend the knee to the shadow king'.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
The High Prophet of Truth said:
Man, I don't want to shut down every scrap of hope left, but so what if he is? What's stopping them from just rejecting it again?
Click to expand...
If I understand correctly, the Texas case at scotus was dismissed because it was a motion for leave, I don't know shit about law, but it seems the bill of complaint was accepted, so they would hear the case, the problem is again the timing.

Texas can't claim harm because nothing happened yet, this is what means having no standing, the electoral college needs to vote, Texas can claim harm, bill of complaint has been accepted so it seems the case CAN be judged on its merits, motion to leave would be to ask a deadline extension of an event but the even has to happen IF I GOOGLED that shit correctly,

So, they are basically saying Texas has a case, but it's too soon come back later once harm has happened.

the Trump campaign possibly has standing in this same case but there is a possibility that this could happen again, no event happened, so no deadllines can be moved.

it seems Texas still has the best case.
 
HTTP Error 404 said:
View attachment 1784347

The same state courts that have literally been making bullshit catch 22s up as to why no once can sue?

Guess the hope is to push them through to the SCOTUS, where the SCOTUS can ... refuse to do their jobs, again, because they're terrified of the implications.
Click to expand...

I say let Trump file just to watch them make another excuse. If they were smart they'd at least hear it and then rule against him. Let them double down on doing nothing and dig the hole further for people to see how hollow they are. One of the best things about Trump has been showing people, even the most rah rah USA people, is to never trust anyone in power or authority.
 
So about the catch-22 kvetsching. Nah, I don't think you're gonna get anywhere on the current avenues with it. And functionally, trying to do it as-is would be stealing the election.

At the time that the voting laws were changed, here's what happened - their legislatures passed a bill, and their judiciaries interpreted the language of the bill and gave a ruling on what the text of the bill implied. Or a challenge made its way up without involving a bill which concerned older legislation, for which the judiciary gave its ruling on interpretation.
At that point in time, if you alleged possible fraud, you would have no standing. Indeed, the damages would be hypothetical - how could a court rule on that?
So the correct legal avenue at that point in time would be to make that constitutional argument, IE that the judiciary violated the state or the US constitution. Standing would not be denied here; making a ruling that contradicts law is inherently a bit deal.
You could also have passed legislation which revised the text of the original bill that the judiciary modified to remove or alter the text which was interpreted so as to allow for the mail-in balloting.

Moving on to the date of the actual vote, the incorrect line of argument to make here is the constitutional one. This is where laches come in. You could have made the constitutional argument leading up to the election well in advance, but the choice to delay doing so until the vote was in is nakedly political.
The proper line of argument to make now is the fraudulent one. You couldn't be denied standing on this basis - if fraud happened, damage happened. The problem has been that there is not enough evidence that is of any actual use to a court to go anywhere with this line. This is why so many committee hearings have been organized - compel the committees to discover enough evidence of fraud that you can actually make a legal case with it and get to discovery. This has also failed.

So when suits are made which attempt to disenfranchise only the mail-in votes, the argument is not being made that they have led to fraud; the argument is being made that they were unconstitutional. And that's why they run into laches - discounting these votes, which overwhelmingly favored Biden, is a nakedly political action that benefits the Trump camp. There is no procedure for a re-do of the vote if these ballots were rejected, and there had been plenty of time to oppose these ballots' collection on constitutional grounds before the election. As-is, the accusers can't even prove that the mail-in ballots were fraudulent; if they could, they would make a suit alleging such which would attempt to compel the state to more thoroughly audit and discard faulty ballots.
The GA effort has gotten far because it made such specific claims in the hopes of forcing an audit, not in disqualifying the votes on a constitutional argument.
You've never been catch-22'd. You just can't support the arguments that are permissible and appropriate at the proper times, and instead attempted lines of argument which are subject to those methods of disqualification.
Nothing stopped you from making the constitutional argument when these judicial interpretations were handed out.
Nothing stops you from making a specific case about fraud at current which doesn't attempt to throw out all of the mail-in ballots.
You could never make fraud allegations before the election as they would be hypothetical.
You can't make constitutional arguments after the election because you wasted the earlier opportunity.
 
Mewtwo_Rain said:
Doubt it. 2016 people decried more thorough investigations into voting, precautions and more. 2020 rolls around and ... Jack squat. Gold fish syndrome strikes again.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the constant news feeds telling you Russian Facebook bots likely altered the outcome of the election. Then the governments own Crossfire hurricane operation where the FBI and CIA generated a phony FISA warrant to investigate General Flynn. Then "Mueller-time" We get it, the system doesn't like Trump.
 
DtoDab said:
If I understand correctly, the Texas case at scotus was dismissed because it was a motion for leave, I don't know shit about law, but it seems the bill of complaint was accepted, so they would hear the case, the problem is again the timing.

Texas can't claim harm because nothing happened yet, this is what means having no standing, the electoral college needs to vote, Texas can claim harm, bill of complaint has been accepted so it seems the case CAN be judged on its merits, motion to leave would be to ask a deadline extension of an event but the even has to happen IF I GOOGLED that shit correctly,

So, they are basically saying Texas has a case, but it's too soon come back later once harm has happened.

the Trump campaign possibly has standing in this same case but there is a possibility that this could happen again, no event happened, so no deadllines can be moved.

it seems Texas still has the best case.
Click to expand...
they're not refiling the texas case, they're taking the arguments in it to the various states. will we see it die on noharm/laches? probably

but maybe not, the plaintiff in wisc was talking about how trump couldn't file against Democracy in the Park because he couldn't show harm before the election. the judge who winged about "show me a single voter who went to democracy in the park" was saying trump could definitetly show harm before the stream was deleted.

thing is there was a wi case about DitP that was thrown out because the court deemed it legal under the law, but in this case it appears that the entire notion vilolates state statues about ballots being limited to handed in by mail and in person at the clerk's office. ditp isnt an alternative clerk location by defendent's claims and agents of the clerks receiving ballots doesnt fulfill the "in person at the clerk's office" according to one judge.

all judges are concerned about disenfrenchisement but the law is also the law, not wi election board.
 
And to the surprised of no one:
https://twitter.com/Wizard_Predicts/status/1337862539288436737
Screenshot_2020-12-12 The Election Wizard on Twitter.png
 
DtoDab said:
basically all the judges are dodging the cases.

seriously, you guys will need new laws about handling election fraud and evidence in the future, that shit is getting ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I'm telling you. If it were literally anyone but Trump, Democrat or Republican, this shit would have been easily taken care of.

The way these cases are going, one thing is most clear:
Grandpa Simpson said:
We get it, the system doesn't like Trump.
Click to expand...
 
HTTP Error 404 said:
View attachment 1784452

Techbros had better pray to god that Trump doesn't somehow pull this off, or the Right doesn't get in power in 2022, 2024, or they're fucked.
Click to expand...
Why is this still a talking point? It's going to take a miracle for Trump to pull this off after all this, and the right won't get shit in either of those years. I'm not even talking about potential voter fraud, just that Trump supporters aren't supporting a party they see as cucks at best and traitors at worst.
 
The High Prophet of Truth said:
Why is this still a talking point? It's going to take a miracle for Trump to pull this off after all this, and the right won't get shit in either of those years. I'm not even talking about potential voter fraud, just that Trump supporters aren't supporting a party they see as cucks at best and traitors at worst.
Click to expand...

Because it's 2020, the year of "oh sure why the fuck not," and we still have 3 weeks left.

WhimsicalTrolli said:
But they won't. The Republican party is dead.
Click to expand...

I didn't say the Republican party. I said the right.

The Uniparty might destroy the GOP via the GOPe, but those 75 million Trump voters aren't just going to go away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom