Someone smarter than me answer this. Does the USSC take this case and squash it 9-0 where it will be set precedent and referred to as “Texas v The Constitution”? Or something to that effect.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
How Much Voter Fraud Happened In 2020? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
The Trump Presidential Library could just be filled with all the behind-the-scenes tell all books. Plus I guess The Art of the Deal.
BigJim®
Footballguy
Yes, but I don't think that is a measure of likelihood of success. It will give the court a decent view of what to expect nearly every election cycle going forward if it opens Pandora's box and allows itself to become a body who decides elections.
Maik Jeaunz
Footballguy
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
I wasted (again) an inordinate and completely embarrassing amount of time listening to this today. I did miss huge chunks of it during the day due to work obligations, but I caught the final part uninterrupted, where the judge questioned the lawyers. At the end, he said he would issue his ruling within a day or two. Based on the judge's comments, my prediction is that he sides with the Trump campaign on jurisdiction, but either abstains, or dismisses the lawsuit based on laches and standing - or some combination of those. Of all the cases I've followed, this one probably had the most coherent and logically-presented argument on the Trump side, but that bar is pretty low. It is still an unprecedented, unsupported and wildly inappropriate request to make to a court. I did appreciate that, at the end of his argument, the lawyer for the governor of Wisconsin noted that the applicable statute provides for attorney's fees and indicated the court should expect to receive a petition to award the defense lawyers' fees.
the rover
Footballguy
zoonation
Footballguy
That's not what the texas case is about. However, answering your question would require some understanding of the scale you are talking about. I'm sure some nominal amount of ineligible votes were cast. For both parties. Of course, it is not controversial anymore that there is no proof whatsoever that this happened on any kind of meaningful scale. It did not.
But, even if I were to grant you that it did, say in the thousands, I would suggest to you that democracy could still survive that type of fraud if it were uncovered. It cannot survive the disenfranchisement of 20 million + voters by a ruling of the Supreme Court on magnificently stupid grounds requested by a political party and the President himself.
Toss it in the bin if that happens. But it won't.
shader
Footballguy
How would any of us possibly know that.
A 20 vs 20 “battle of the states” in the Supreme Court is so unprecedented that imo it’s impossible to predict what will happen.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
Is TX at least asking for a "do-over"?
the rover
Footballguy
I am making an assumption based on 25 years of practicing and studying law. Something being “unprecedented” doesn’t change the calculus of whether the SC should hear it; to the contrary, it probably makes it much less likely.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thunderlips
Footballguy
Seriously....does anyone want a situation where individual states can sue other states to make sure their votes don't count? Texas itself would become a huge target for the forseable future election cycles. By the number of EC votes is has and the idea that it is trending steadily less red.....it's going to have its share of voter supression/irregularites/claims of fraud REGARDLESS of this suit.
Unless Trump supporters feel they can thread the needle on this; get the results they want and then close the door so it never happens again.....this isn't something they're going to want to be able to be used against them in the future.
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
So in a lawsuit where a state is suing other states to throw out every single vote cast in those 4 states, that is filed to the Supreme Court, in what would absolutely be one of the most momentous and impactful results of a lawsuit in our nation’s history if they won, Texas filed a suit with garbage like that’s shown in this tweet where basic information is just flat out missing in the suit.
Sure, it’s just references missing to pages where specific arguments are to be found in their claim, but that kind of sloppiness in a suit that should have been filed with the utmost seriousness just shows how UNserious the suit really is.
This is not elite strike force legal work. This is not even good legal work. This is sloppy garbage that tells you everything you need to know about the people who are filing and supporting it.
Sure, it’s just references missing to pages where specific arguments are to be found in their claim, but that kind of sloppiness in a suit that should have been filed with the utmost seriousness just shows how UNserious the suit really is.
This is not elite strike force legal work. This is not even good legal work. This is sloppy garbage that tells you everything you need to know about the people who are filing and supporting it.
Sea Duck
Footballguy
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
JAA
Footballguy
JAA
Footballguy
JAA
Footballguy
I will need to check my briefs to be sure. There is precedent with the motion Im about to perform. I’m going to lache while standing. Move along
SPOILER ALERT - MY POSTS WERE SARCASTIC
Last edited by a moderator:
JAA
Footballguy
Godsbrother
Footballguy
No they want to do away with the results of the popular votes in the 4 battleground states and appoint republican electors that will name Trump as the winner.
Totally normal stuff
Last edited by a moderator:
Sea Duck
Footballguy
Right. Not to mention the fact that most of these states have laws which specifically prohibit their legislatures from appointing electors after Election Day, and U.S. law prohibits states from switching certified Electors after December 8th. So, on the one hand, all these Republicans are complaining about other states breaking the law; but at the same time, they are arguing that it should be OK for them to break their own laws.
Madden Curse
Footballguy
I totally forgot there was a Politics forum, and I was saddened to show up today and read that so many people here were/are willing to entertain nutty conspiracy theories about voter fraud.
Remind me what evidence Trump managed to dig up during the past 4 years to prove the so-called "massive fraud" he alleged during the 2016 election.
Remind me what evidence Trump managed to dig up during the past 4 years to prove the so-called "massive fraud" he alleged during the 2016 election.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Lin Wood filed a brief.
It is truly one of the worst briefs I've ever seen filed before the Supreme Court. It's a traffic court motion level of work. Just astounding.
It is truly one of the worst briefs I've ever seen filed before the Supreme Court. It's a traffic court motion level of work. Just astounding.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
What's your honest opinion here, are he and Powell (among others) just that bad as lawyers, or is it that they realize they aren't going to win regardless, their payment is not dependent on winning, and they're just having an intern do it as quickly as possible so they can file more suits and get paid more?
apalmer
Footballguy
apalmer
Footballguy
Would you believe...no candidate has ever lost an election while carrying Florida, Ohio, Iowa and...Alaska?
Tom Hagen
Footballguy
The shtick of the FBG PSF filing an amicus brief would be pretty fantastic.
"as referenced in fatguyinaittlecoats's post of December 9..."
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Uwe Blab
Footballguy
apalmer
Footballguy
Rich Conway
Footballguy
apalmer
Footballguy
Witz
Footballguy
Brad Heath
@bradheath
Montana's governor says his state did many of the things Texas said make an election illegal but Texas didn't sue them because Trump won, "underscoring, of course, that this is less about election integrity than it is about attempting to overturn the will of the electorate."
8:48 AM · Dec 11, 2020·Twitter Web App
https://mobile.twitter.com/bradheath/status/1337393949263224833
@bradheath
Montana's governor says his state did many of the things Texas said make an election illegal but Texas didn't sue them because Trump won, "underscoring, of course, that this is less about election integrity than it is about attempting to overturn the will of the electorate."
8:48 AM · Dec 11, 2020·Twitter Web App
https://mobile.twitter.com/bradheath/status/1337393949263224833
apalmer
Footballguy
@Joe Bryant, here's the answer to your earlier question of whether AGs can "do whatever they want?" The Montana AG has signed on with the amicus brief supporting Texas. Now, the Montana Governor is filing in opposition to Texas on the basis that Montana did the same thing as the Defendants and doesn't want its election wiped out.
SWC
Bromigo
may it please the court chief justicehan we are here today because the president came on a november day bringing gifts from a kamchatka bay but the voters made it clear he couldnt stay the white house was not his home all the people say judgehans one of you likes beer what a good group you would be if you would dismiss this legal tragedy doo doo doo do do do do do do do do do i rest our case see also brandy by looking glass 1972 take that to the bank bromigos
Last edited by a moderator:
AAABatteries
Footballguy
It makes me wonder if the ultimate goal here isn’t to overturn these 4 (although I’m sure they would love that) but rather introduce so much chaos that even smart people start asking whether we should do the election over. It’s garbage and hopefully gets thrown out quickly.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
One more example of the craziness on this unprecedented situation brought on by the Retrumplican party.
apalmer
Footballguy
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
I have honestly no idea. We all have some level of professionalism that would, I hope, make sure that when we file something it is actually..... professional.
He literally filed his previous brief word for word with a new cover page. I mean, he calls himself throughout it Petitioner and requests the court to overturn the 11th circuit. In an amicus brief filed in support of a motion filed by the actual petitioner that has nothing to do with an appeal from the 11th circuit.
I do this in municipal court (Traffic court). The motions don't change, just the names. The law hasn't changed here in such a long time there is no point in reinventing the wheel. But we at least change the names and the court.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
I saw on twitter....forgot who, not gonna look again, and certainly not going to copy and paste it - that someone has officially called this the Cold Civil War.
So, I was right about that.
And the jacobin thing 4 years ago, but I've beat that drum so much it needs a new head.
So, I was right about that.
And the jacobin thing 4 years ago, but I've beat that drum so much it needs a new head.
2Squirrels1Nut
Footballguy
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Texas filed replies. To say they doubled down is an understatement.
And Citizens United filed a brief. And their position is that, the Defendant states and their supporters are destroying the Union. Their brief is the argument of the confederacy in certain places.
This is just ridiculous to a level that is hard to write at this point.
And Citizens United filed a brief. And their position is that, the Defendant states and their supporters are destroying the Union. Their brief is the argument of the confederacy in certain places.
This is just ridiculous to a level that is hard to write at this point.
JAA
Footballguy
In all seriousness ... seriously. Is there a specific reason they are only choosing those states? Haven't many other states exhibited that same behavior?
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
Similar threads
