Moonglow
Diamond Member
Courts don't work on he said-she said testimony and what was presented failed to sway the judge or establish any proof beyond a doubt.Affidavits existance ? Heck they showed up as witnesses attesting to their signed affidavits in light of their sworn testimony given at those hearings based on their affidavits.Where are those affidavits right now? You were told there were affidavits did you ever see one that was notarized and had a docket number along with an ID number for evidence?It is over and your lies will never stand in court.Does yer Rascal hovers round have enough battery power to propel you into the front lines of another civil war?This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable.
The US Constitution has no provisions for how states run an election.
The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.
Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center
Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholarsconstitutioncenter.org
I never was able to complete my law degree and I take great offence to the state AG who is ignorant of just how the Constitution works along with state control of elections....
that is not what the ruling was about. they ruled that Texas and the other states did not have standing to bring the suit. look up lack of standing, you might learn something and stop posting like an idiot.
Yeah, about 100 posters here told the cult that TX didn’t have standing. But the poorly educated cultists really thought TX could win. The ruling was effectively 9-0 as Thomas and Alito said there were no remedies.
It was all Kabuki Theater. But cults gonna cult.
like your fellow libs, you also do not understand what lack of standing means in a court of american law. It is not the final straw. It is certainly a set back, but not the end of the fight. It may be that the only workable remedy is secession or breaking up the country into conservative and liberal separate countries. None of us want that, but with the country so divided philosophically it may be the only solution. If we cannot live together, lets live separately. Then we can see which system actually works.
I don't have whatever that is, but I have several guns and thousands of rounds of ammo. We would also have the police and the military and you would have the trannys who don't know which bathroom to use. it would be a very short war. A peaceful secession or division would be much better for everyone and would allow each side to live under its own ideology. We would take constitutional freedom and you can have socialist domination. Ready?
The problem is that the military are not with Trump, and neither is anyone else who swore to uphold the Constitution. The PEOPLE were never with Trump. He didn't win the popular vote the first time, and this time the PEOPLE made sure he didn't win the Electoral College or the popular vote.
He lost the military when he involved them in his walk across LaFayette Square, and gassing peaceful protestors. When he abandoned the Kurds. He lost the military when he didn't stand up for them against Russian bounties. When he called them suckers and losers.
And the longer that Trump tries to fight the will of the people, the less support he will have.
you are totally FOS. Did you happen to see the reception he got at the Army/Navy game yesterday? Trump has the military support, the police unions all support him, and all american patriots who own gums and ammo support him. So continue with your attempted coup, you will reap your reward eventually. The american people will only tolerate so much of this left wing socialist bullshit.
Trump was cheered at a public event where he is the Commander-In-Chief, and any booing or disrespect shown by a cadet would be punishable as a military offense? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
Why do you think that Trump carefully controls where he appears in public? Like his West Point commencement address? It's because everywhere that Trump has gone in public where he doesn't carefully control the audience, he is mocked, booed, and shouted down. Like his trip to the baseball game. Trump hides out in fortress White House, surrounded by barbed wire and riot fencing, so he doesn't have to hear the jeers of the PEOPLE outside.
Of course the police unions support him. These are the same unions which have allowed killer cops to stay on the payroll and on your streets. The cop who held his knee on George Floyd's neck had 17 complaints of "excessive force" and was involved in another shooting death of a suspect, and yet this murderer was still on the streets in black communities.
THE VOTERS REJECTED HIM. NOBODY IS CHEERING DONALD TRUMP EXCEPT HIS CULT.
Hmmm, guess you missed the thousands who attended his rallies all over the country. no boos or jeers from them, only cheers.
guess you also missed that Biden could not generate a crowd of more than 100 for any of his attempts at campaigning. so much easier to just hide in the basement and let the dominion machines do the work for him.
Trump got more actual legal votes than Biden, the evidence of cheating is clear. this is not over.
so the hundreds of americans who signed affidavits under oath are all lying? How would such a thing be coordinated? many of them are democrats who actually care about fair and accurate elections. Please prove to us that they are all lying under oath.
At their news conference Thursday, President Trump’s lawyers implored reporters to take their thus-far-baseless allegations of massive voter fraud more seriously. And in the course of doing so, they repeatedly referred to the hundreds of affidavits they had assembled as genuine evidence of fraud.
“It’s your job to read these things and not falsely report that there’s no evidence,” said Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer.
“We have evidence that we will present to the court,” Trump campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis said.
“These people are under penalty of perjury,” Giuliani assured again about the affidavits. “Their names are on an affidavit.”
But how much weight do these affidavits carry? And what is their true reliability?
The Trump campaign has repeatedly cited the hundreds of sworn affidavits it has assembled. It has even shown stacks of them to illustrate the supposed heft of its legal case. Many of them are not available because they haven’t been filed in actual lawsuits or made available publicly. (Giuliani cited the alleged targeting of their authors for keeping them obscured.)
But among the witnesses who have had their allegations aired in court, many have been dismissed by judges as inadmissible or not credible. One particularly high-profile one alleged many precincts in Michigan had more votes than actual voters, but shortly after Giuliani et al. raised the issue Thursday — alongside their pleas to take the affidavits seriously — it fell apart.
A key issue is whether the affidavit is filed in court, as most filed by the Trump team haven’t been. Beyond that, any false statements would need to be deemed to be “material” to the proceedings — i.e. relevant to the actual claims. And from there, any legal jeopardy would require that the statements made were knowingly false.
But you keep on repeating the same old lies and misinformation der fuhrer has planted in yer mind that is of no use to anyone but those that exploit it...
