Jump to content

the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Ok, ok, ok. Which law school do you attend to learn such erudite phrases but maybe don't know how the story ends? Death Star Redux: The Legal Edition

 

She's a fucking lunatic.  She came in on the Flynn case and smeared shit all over the walls and rubbed it in her hair (and fairly obviously still does the hair part).  And she still had to have TrumpBarrCo bail out her client.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Trump coup has rounded the scary corner and is now on the home stretch of great comedy. I hope he keeps it going forever.

I pray to Allah that Trump remains the head of the GOP for the foreseeable future and leaves them broken in a ditch somewhere. they’re too big of pussies to renounce their god, right?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

There's no doubt a few instances of voter fraud. I'm actually still registered in Travis county even though I moved out of state years ago -- need to take myself off the rolls so Travis Co Dems will quit calling me. I could have voted in two stayes pretty easily and not sure if they have cross-state references to detect it. But I didn't because it's wrong and not worth the risk. I'm guessing MAGA folks would be less worried about those things and if you knew about every instance of voter fraud, it'd be much more in Trump's direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 'stache said:

It’s pretty stunning to me that Rudy’s name used to be on a major well respected BigLaw firm. I would never hire anyone associated with that firm. 

I’m surprised Bracewell doesn’t change their name completely.  That stench will never leave.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me spare y’all the suspense.
Trump has and will claim fraud, as will his lawyers.
Judges will ask for evidence and the lawyers will shrug their shoulders.
Judges will dismiss all cases and lawyers will go home
Trump will still claim fraud and his dipshit supporters will echo that claim.
At some point trump will give up and flee, whereabouts unknown. 
Meanwhile hundreds of thousands will die for Corona. 
Biden gets sworn in as president on January 20 and inherits the biggest shitshow ever inherited. 


That is indeed the most likely scenario. I mean, all we have in front of us are different types of shit sandwiches. That one would be the most palatable.

If this fiasco has taught us anything, it’s that there are too many goddamn lawyers.


Look, what breaks my heart here - absolutely tears out my soul - is that I KNOW that there are lawyers billing hours to Trumpco.....who won’t get paid.

LAWYERS WHO AREN’T GOING TO BE PAID. Jesus. Makes me shiver just to type that.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 


That is indeed the most likely scenario. I mean, all we have in front of us are different types of shit sandwiches. That one would be the most palatable.



Look, what breaks my heart here - absolutely tears out my soul - is that I KNOW that there are lawyers billing hours to Trumpco.....who won’t get paid.

LAWYERS WHO AREN’T GOING TO BE PAID. Jesus. Makes me shiver just to type that.

 

It would be interesting to be privy to all the thought processes here.

Is it a cause to which they're (or at least some law-firm powers) really committed, either as Trumpkins or defending some abstract notion of election integrity?  If this were the case, I would think they would be willing to volunteer or do it pro bono.   As we might in opposing them.

Or is it merely an opportunity to turn on the billing faucets 24/7 for weeks at a time?  This only makes sense if you are fairly certain you will get paid.   Individual voter plaintiffs aren't paying squat.  RNC probably paying like a slot machine.  Various Trump-related organizations probably in financial straits.

Or is it a thought that there's benefit to being involved in high-profile litigation, odious client and cause notwithstanding?  And payment in full in question?  Maybe they don't think the client and cause is odious, which circles back to the first question.

I'm glad I don't have these questions coming up in my practice on the regular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to be privy to all the thought processes here.
Is it a cause to which they're (or at least some law-firm powers) really committed, either as Trumpkins or defending some abstract notion of election integrity?  If this were the case, I would think they would be willing to volunteer or do it pro bono.   
Or is it merely an opportunity to turn on the billing faucets 24/7 for weeks at a time?  This only makes sense if you are fairly certain you will get paid.   


I know some bat-shit crazy Trumper lawyers. While Big Law might hesitate, any deplorable lawyer owning/controlling a smaller firm might welcome the chance to get some rep among the true believer business community in exchange for their golf course time.

Alabama bidnesses would welcome your attempt to Stop the Steal.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:


I know some bat-shit crazy Trumper lawyers. While Big Law might hesitate, any deplorable lawyer owning/controlling a smaller firm might welcome the chance to get some rep among the true believer business community in exchange for their golf course time.

Alabama bidnesses would welcome your attempt to Stop the Steal.

Yeah, I think that's certainly true.  I was thinking more along the lines of larger firms, if not biglaw types, where there's more diversity of opinion, and clear thinking.

For a lot of these solo/ideological firm types, it's a labor of hatred.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So they are cutting a shitload of stuff out of their PA lawsuit

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.125.1.pdf

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/15/trump-lawsuit-pennsylvania-election-results-436705
 

Quote

President Donald Trump’s campaign has dramatically scaled back its federal lawsuit challenging the election results in Pennsylvania, dropping legal claims stemming from observers who assert they were blocked from viewing vote-counting in counties dominated by Democrats.

The retrenched version of the suit filed late Sunday morning with a federal court in Williamsport, Pa., withdrew the request for relief over the poll-watching allegations and now focuses solely on varying practices by county officials for handling mail-in ballots that lacked an internal secrecy envelope or otherwise ran afoul of the state’s election rules.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he's kinda right in that the complaint continues to recite a bit about poll watchers.

But he's absolutely wrong in that the complaint goes from Seven counts or causes of action down to Two, neither of which has anything to do with poll watchers. 

What the fuck is a "WAPO activist"?

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites


giphy.gif

“We get paid by the paragraph you know, addin’ ‘em or deletin’ ‘em!”
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

 

Does Rudy imagine that 

1) anyone actually did what he’s claiming

2) theres proof

3) the 600k ballots can be identified 

4) the correct and likely remedy is that they are all thrown out as unlawful votes, rather than having them inspected correctly and counted/not counted individually based on meeting requirements

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Does Rudy imagine that 

1) anyone actually did what he’s claiming

2) theres proof

3) the 600k ballots can be identified 

4) the correct and likely remedy is that they are all thrown out as unlawful votes, rather than having them inspected correctly and counted/not counted individually based on meeting requirements

?

Believe it or not, he's an attorney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Rudy imagine that 
1) anyone actually did what he’s claiming
2) theres proof
3) the 600k ballots can be identified 
4) the correct and likely remedy is that they are all thrown out as unlawful votes, rather than having them inspected correctly and counted/not counted individually based on meeting requirements
?

If you repeat baseless allegations twice they get in without proof, see? Three times and

giphy.gif
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...