Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
For Bush v. Gore notoriously announced that “[o]ur consideration is limited to the present circumstances,” a line which some legal academics likened to a ticket good for one day only, or a self-destruct mechanism: after the President was chosen, the case blew up. Was the Supreme Court really trying to signal that Bush v. Gore should have no precedential value?And there are constituional issues pending resolution like the Pennsylvania Supreme Court can nor reverse or ignore Bush v Gore (2000).
For Bush v. Gore notoriously announced that “[o]ur consideration is limited to the present circumstances,” a line which some legal academics likened to a ticket good for one day only, or a self-destruct mechanism: after the President was chosen, the case blew up. Was the Supreme Court really trying to signal that Bush v. Gore should have no precedential value?And there are constituional issues pending resolution like the Pennsylvania Supreme Court can nor reverse or ignore Bush v Gore (2000).
Maybe. Or maybe the lazy mail in ballot idea results in fake votes. We will never know, Herr Lesh.Then you're an idiot.I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.Obama appointed judge. Nothing to see here folks..
Trump is 2-34 in the courts by both Republican and Democratic judges. And none of those 2 have advanced beyond a rejection of Trump's claim.
But keep culting!
The level of "enthusiasm" on both sides is nearly unprecedented
So more voted because they could mail in votes? Maybe. 25 mil more?I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.Obama appointed judge. Nothing to see here folks..
Trump is 2-34 in the courts by both Republican and Democratic judges. And none of those 2 have advanced beyond a rejection of Trump's claim.
But keep culting!
Really? Between the Coronavirus, the protests/riots, and the incredible polarization we've seen under the Trump administration (not blaming him for it, just pointing out that it's there), I don't find it all that surprising that voter turnout increased. That's even more true when you add in how mail-in voting was made available to everyone, so people didn't have to take a day off work, go to a polling place, etc.
People were given easier access to voting, had a few major issues to vote about, and many seem to feel that letting the 'other side' win would be terrible for them or the country as a whole.
I am not skeptical he lost. I am skeptical that 25mil more voted. Let’s take DJT. You believe he got 72 mil votes? I do not buy it. Explain to me why I should believe that.I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.
Yeah, you are allowed skepticism. But are you as skeptical about Trump's claims too?
Trump has had 2 out of 36 claims in court go his way. One of those two was tossed out by the PA SC last week. I don't know what the other one was.
So if someone told you "My baseball team is the very best and they're going to win the World Series." And someone else tells you that the record of that baseball team is 2-34, who are you skeptical of? The one boasting that they're going to win the World Series or the one who tells you the team's record is 2-34?
Look it up stupid. I did. You know how to work the google machine right?So more voted because they could mail in votes? Maybe. 25 mil more?I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.Obama appointed judge. Nothing to see here folks..
Trump is 2-34 in the courts by both Republican and Democratic judges. And none of those 2 have advanced beyond a rejection of Trump's claim.
But keep culting!
Really? Between the Coronavirus, the protests/riots, and the incredible polarization we've seen under the Trump administration (not blaming him for it, just pointing out that it's there), I don't find it all that surprising that voter turnout increased. That's even more true when you add in how mail-in voting was made available to everyone, so people didn't have to take a day off work, go to a polling place, etc.
People were given easier access to voting, had a few major issues to vote about, and many seem to feel that letting the 'other side' win would be terrible for them or the country as a whole.
On what do you base this skepticism...jerk offI am not skeptical he lost. I am skeptical that 25mil more voted. Let’s take DJT. You believe he got 72 mil votes? I do not buy it. Explain to me why I should believe that.
Just like all the other ones.
Trump and his allies are now 2-34 in court.
A federal judge on Saturday dismissed a Trump campaign lawsuit that accused Pennsylvania officials of enabling voter fraud, opening the way for the state to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory and dealing a blow to the president’s narrowing legal options.U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann said the Trump campaign had used the lawsuit to attempt to discard legally cast votes, rejecting arguments made by President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, that Pennsylvania’s mail-in ballot procedures presented the opportunity for widespread voter fraud.In his ruling, Judge Brann concluded the lawsuit was marred by “strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations…unsupported by evidence.”“In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state,” wrote Judge Brann, an Obama appointee who has been a member of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal group.
Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Campaign Lawsuit in Pennsylvania
The lawsuit, which had sought to halt vote certification, was one of the last remaining legal avenues for the president’s campaign in the state.www.wsj.com
View attachment 419660
Understood.
The ignorant federal judge does not understand that this is not business as usual.
That what the socialists seek is to completely abandon our Constitutional Form of Government and create a socialist republic.
In a socialist republic his job will be unnecessary and will be eliminated.
And you are so stupid that in your quest to get rid of Trump you are willing to devastate our country,
It may take a while but the evidence is fraud is forthcoming.
.
Gee, the Supreme Court has never stated that it had no precedential value.
It ruled therein that ONLY the Florida Legislature could decide how elections would be conducted.
The Pa Supreme Court ruled that under the present circumstances it could ignore the Legislature's intent.
I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.
Yeah, you are allowed skepticism. But are you as skeptical about Trump's claims too?
Trump has had 2 out of 36 claims in court go his way. One of those two was tossed out by the PA SC last week. I don't know what the other one was.
So if someone told you "My baseball team is the very best and they're going to win the World Series." And someone else tells you that the record of that baseball team is 2-34, who are you skeptical of? The one boasting that they're going to win the World Series or the one who tells you the team's record is 2-34?
Just like all the other ones.
Trump and his allies are now 2-34 in court.
A federal judge on Saturday dismissed a Trump campaign lawsuit that accused Pennsylvania officials of enabling voter fraud, opening the way for the state to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory and dealing a blow to the president’s narrowing legal options.U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann said the Trump campaign had used the lawsuit to attempt to discard legally cast votes, rejecting arguments made by President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, that Pennsylvania’s mail-in ballot procedures presented the opportunity for widespread voter fraud.In his ruling, Judge Brann concluded the lawsuit was marred by “strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations…unsupported by evidence.”“In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state,” wrote Judge Brann, an Obama appointee who has been a member of the Federalist Society, a conservative legal group.
Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Campaign Lawsuit in Pennsylvania
The lawsuit, which had sought to halt vote certification, was one of the last remaining legal avenues for the president’s campaign in the state.
View attachment 419660
Daryl Hunt at Trump's upcoming inauguration, "I lost the Toro account and I have to hide like Stats all because SCOTUS overruled all those sweet lower court victories"
I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.
Yeah, you are allowed skepticism. But are you as skeptical about Trump's claims too?
Trump has had 2 out of 36 claims in court go his way. One of those two was tossed out by the PA SC last week. I don't know what the other one was.
So if someone told you "My baseball team is the very best and they're going to win the World Series." And someone else tells you that the record of that baseball team is 2-34, who are you skeptical of? The one boasting that they're going to win the World Series or the one who tells you the team's record is 2-34?
The other one was a case during the original counting of votes.
trump went to court to get his observers to be able to stand 6 ft away from those counting ballots.
It had nothing to do with vote fraud or computers changing votes or any of the nonsense the right has been spewing.
So the one case that he won and stood was where observers could stand while the votes were counted.
That's it.
Google machine aka fake news?Look it up stupid. I did. You know how to work the google machine right?So more voted because they could mail in votes? Maybe. 25 mil more?I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.Obama appointed judge. Nothing to see here folks..
Trump is 2-34 in the courts by both Republican and Democratic judges. And none of those 2 have advanced beyond a rejection of Trump's claim.
But keep culting!
Really? Between the Coronavirus, the protests/riots, and the incredible polarization we've seen under the Trump administration (not blaming him for it, just pointing out that it's there), I don't find it all that surprising that voter turnout increased. That's even more true when you add in how mail-in voting was made available to everyone, so people didn't have to take a day off work, go to a polling place, etc.
People were given easier access to voting, had a few major issues to vote about, and many seem to feel that letting the 'other side' win would be terrible for them or the country as a whole.
Herr Lesh, I do not believe that many people vote. Have never done before in history.On what do you base this skepticism...jerk offI am not skeptical he lost. I am skeptical that 25mil more voted. Let’s take DJT. You believe he got 72 mil votes? I do not buy it. Explain to me why I should believe that.
I am far from a legal expert. I am Allowed skepticism. I find it hard to believe that 25mil more people voted in this election when compared to 2016.Obama appointed judge. Nothing to see here folks..
Trump is 2-34 in the courts by both Republican and Democratic judges. And none of those 2 have advanced beyond a rejection of Trump's claim.
But keep culting!
Call us when the Trump owned SCOTUS has ruled.
