the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

[Js1 85527]

“vague responses, platitudes and empty promises of follow-up”

Buddy that’s the whole damn trump presidency. You moron. 

[Shaddie 1651]

3 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Presumably this Eshelman cat is of above average intelligence. He has a doctorate in pharmacy and started a a business (PPD) which he grew to a  multi-billion dollar enterprise with 25,000 employees. Yet he got fleeced like the rest of them. What the fuck happened to these people's brains? I'll never understand it. 

 

It’s a disease that can happen to some super successful people. They think their shit doesn’t stink and all their decisions will turn out exactly as they saw it in their head. 

[Yuk 1554]

 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Yuk

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

for the 2 or 3% of people on here that are not lawyers and are curious about how to benchmark the stuff being tweeted about, those sidney powell filings are quite literally the worst federal pleadings i have ever seen.  a third year associate running his own case for the first time would immediately get called in to a supervisor's office if they were filed, it would make it on the yearly review, and it would probably color every evaluation of them going forward for years assuming they could hang on to the job when everyone around them thinks they are some combination of a dumbass and mentally unstable. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Never mind 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Neonmoon
Too slow

[TwiceHorn 31529]

11 hours ago, ndawg said:

I don't think an inability to self-govern is actually our root problem. Our political dysfunction is just a manifestation of a cultural one.

We simply can't be the America that our education system tells us we used to be. American liberals are largely rejecting the American identity altogether, and while Trumpists cling to it with a desperate but futile zeal, they don't really understand it as anything more than a costume to put on. Very few people are actually stopping to look at the real problem, which is that we've grown up consuming massive amounts of passive entertainment, fast food, and entitlement -- and so none of us really knows how to keep the American machine that we inherited running anymore.

I'm an optimist, though. I like to think there's a way through this mess that doesn't lead to our ruin, if we keep looking for it.

I may not have been paying attention, but for the last month or two, at least, you have been making some really solid posts: well-written, clear, with some really solid insight.

This is yet another one.  Props!

[Guest Lobo]

Are they still running this out of the Wyndham Hotel?  Or is more like Losedham?  Amirite?  

Serious question---are we calling bowel movements this turkey weekend, Dropping a Trump or Releasing a Kraken?  I need to know.  

Edited November 27, 2020 by Lobo

[Gatorubet 30290]

It’s a disease that can happen to some super successful people. They think their shit doesn’t stink and all their decisions will turn out exactly as they saw it in their head. 

And nobody tells them “no” when a bad idea comes up b/c they want to keep their $ job. Emperor’s Clothes syndrome.

[SizzleChest 8284]

30 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Presumably this Eshelman cat is of above average intelligence. He has a doctorate in pharmacy and started a a business (PPD) which he grew to a  multi-billion dollar enterprise with 25,000 employees. Yet he got fleeced like the rest of them. What the fuck happened to these people's brains? I'll never understand it. 

 

Hahaha Fred.  He's a fuckstick of the highest order and has a litany of sexual harassment lawsuits to prove it.  Dude used to post up in the office and stare at hot female employees like he was a rancher overseeing his herd.  Allegedly.

[TexasEd 8071]

23 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

for the 2 or 3% of people on here that are not lawyers and are curious about how to benchmark the stuff being tweeted about, those sidney powell filings are quite literally the worst federal pleadings i have ever seen.  a third year associate running his own case for the first time would immediately get called in to a supervisor's office if they were filed, it would make it on the yearly review, and it would probably color every evaluation of them going forward for years assuming they could hang on to the job when everyone around them thinks they are some combination of a dumbass and mentally unstable. 

I would have thought it would grade out worse for a person that presumably has a law degree and passed the bar.  I'd ground my middle schoolers for turning in a paper like that.

[ndawg 1242]

34 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I may not have been paying attention, but for the last month or two, at least, you have been making some really solid posts: well-written, clear, with some really solid insight.

This is yet another one.  Props!

Thanks! This board has a fascinating cross section of very intelligent people. Just doing my best to rise to the level of the group.

[aggie08 21525]

54 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

for the 2 or 3% of people on here that are not lawyers

It's okay. You can just call us peasants.

[TwiceHorn 31529]

56 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

for the 2 or 3% of people on here that are not lawyers and are curious about how to benchmark the stuff being tweeted about, those sidney powell filings are quite literally the worst federal pleadings i have ever seen.  a third year associate running his own case for the first time would immediately get called in to a supervisor's office if they were filed, it would make it on the yearly review, and it would probably color every evaluation of them going forward for years assuming they could hang on to the job when everyone around them thinks they are some combination of a dumbass and mentally unstable. 

Yeah.  It's not loss-of-rights/malpractice bad, but pretty shoddy.

One of my bosses at my first firm made the point that as lawyers, we basically "sell our papers."  Therefore, they should always look decent and be free of obvious errors, because the client, at least, will judge us on that basis.

One of the most curious things, not blatantly wrong, is the paragraph numbers being centered and on a different line than the rest of the paragraph.  

As an appellate lawyer, and an apparently quite successful one, Sydney Powell lived and died by the quality of her briefs (that is really all courts of appeals look at), which would include formatting, grammar, and punctuation as well as more substantive content.  For an old hag like she is, she may have been reliant on a good secretary or assistant for the format, spelling, etc. of her papers and she may not have that anymore.

Or it may be another sign of her crumbling mental state.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

1 hour ago, Blotto said:

Presumably this Eshelman cat is of above average intelligence. He has a doctorate in pharmacy and started a a business (PPD) which he grew to a  multi-billion dollar enterprise with 25,000 employees. Yet he got fleeced like the rest of them. What the fuck happened to these people's brains? I'll never understand it. 

He's no Bob Brockman, but he gets by.

Seriously, this dipstick is the head of an equity firm that specializes in pharmaceuticals. I have never met him, but I already know he kicks puppies and hates America.

[Hagbard Celine 10909]

1 hour ago, Shaddie said:

It’s a disease that can happen to some super successful people. They think their shit doesn’t stink and all their decisions will turn out exactly as they saw it in their head. 

Control of cashflow is directly proportional to dykwia for 2/3rds of all businesses that top out below $50m revenue.  I have seen it up close and personal 500+ times in the past decade.

[Cousin Strawberry 1261]

2 hours ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

for the 2 or 3% of people on here that are not lawyers and are curious about how to benchmark the stuff being tweeted about, those sidney powell filings are quite literally the worst federal pleadings i have ever seen.  a third year associate running his own case for the first time would immediately get called in to a supervisor's office if they were filed, it would make it on the yearly review, and it would probably color every evaluation of them going forward for years assuming they could hang on to the job when everyone around them thinks they are some combination of a dumbass and mentally unstable. 

And if you were an associate with a small firm, I think you would just be fired.  That type of ineptitude is unforgivable. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

1 hour ago, aggie08 said:

It's okay. You can just call us peasants.

if i deign to talk to you at all

[BrickHorn 18277]

2 hours ago, Shaddie said:

It’s a disease that can happen to some super successful people. They think their shit doesn’t stink and all their decisions will turn out exactly as they saw it in their head. 

Or maybe even really smart, successful people aren’t all that much smarter than the rest of us and capitalism just has a way of amplifying minor differences in capability and effort into huge discrepancies in wealth.

[Brisketexan 105275]

Or maybe even really smart, successful people aren’t all that much smarter than the rest of us and capitalism just has a way of amplifying minor differences in capability and effort into huge discrepancies in wealth.

Bingo. The American mentality of “he’s rich, that proves he’s super smart” is one of the dumbest things we think. Being rich can be a product of many circumstances and attributes. Not all of them are good. Some are quite bad. For example, someone of above average intelligence, who also happens to be an amoral sociopath, can make gobs more money than someone of the same IQ who has a moral compass. Someone who started with 10 million of dad’s money will usually end up richer than a smart guy who started off broke, etc. Wealth is a terrible proxy for intelligence.

There are few better examples of that than the abject moron (who’s not even particularly rich) we put in the WH.

[RDCanecutter 26466]

2 hours ago, Blotto said:

2 hours ago, Blotto said:

Presumably this Eshelman cat is of above average intelligence. 

 

Cons play on someone's sense of their own importance. It's easier to trick somebody who is so smart (in something other than getting conned) that they think they are above getting tricked.

A dude who knows he's a dumbass might actually ask questions.

Or maybe not. #MAGA.

[HenryJames 66160]

 

[Js1 85527]

36 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

3 panel conservative court led by a Trump appointee = ACTIVIST!

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Link to opinion

Judge says allegations are conculsory. 

Edited November 27, 2020 by Neonmoon

[TwiceHorn 31529]

That is possibly a bigger dookystomp than the district court's opinion.

One of the things it notes is that many of the issues related to vote-handling had been raised in other cases, in both PA and federal courts and resolved against the campaign.

Also, the opinion states "Bush v. Gore does not federalize every jot and tittle of state election law."  Fantastic.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[HenryJames 66160]

 

[tx 3 putt 77336]

Bibas is obviously an Biden / Obama / Hillary sleeper agent !!!!!

[Biff Tannen 45712]

2 hours ago, ndawg said:

Thanks! This board has a fascinating cross section of very intelligent people. Just doing my best to rise to the level of the group.

Sorry for bringing the board down. But I have learned a fuck ton the past 4 years. 

[TwiceHorn 31529]

So much of the fear of Trump judicial nominees is overblown.  Granted, some in the lower courts are marginally competent, and there is some to be feared from the Supreme Court justices, but the lower court judges aren't in position or inclined to wreak much havoc, and the Supremes could have been easily appointed by any GOP president.

[TwiceHorn 31529]

Oooh, and there's also some actual malpractice involved.

The Third Circuit notes that the "stay" they request is actually an "injunction pending appeal," which you have to ask the trial court for, in order to build a record, before you seek it in the court of appeals.  They failed to ask the trial court, so it's barred by the rules.

In a more conventional case, with real clients asserting real rights, they'd have a malpractice cause of action for that.

Fun fact.  Duckduckgoing mudhole for that image pulls it from hornfans.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[HenryJames 66160]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

So much of the fear of Trump judicial nominees is overblown.

On this specific case.

[TwiceHorn 31529]

1 minute ago, HenryJames said:

On this specific case.

No, more generally.

[wildcat09 29376]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

So much of the fear of Trump judicial nominees is overblown.  Granted, some in the lower courts are marginally competent, and there is some to be feared from the Supreme Court justices, but the lower court judges aren't in position or inclined to wreak much havoc, and the Supremes could have been easily appointed by any GOP president.

I don’t think “they didn’t commit incredibly egregious election theft in a case in which they had literally no factual basis on which to justify it” warrants much praise. 

Given the tiny number of cases that make it to SCOTUS, the appellate courts have enormous power to push the law in some bad directions in ways that have a really harmful impact on millions of people and I think there’s pretty good reason to think Trump’s appointees will do that. 

We got lucky that the election wasn’t closer and that the ratfuckers were too lazy and incompetent this time to provide conservative judges with a pretextual justification. Trump’s appointees are still a bunch of federalist society goons that effectively believe the civil war amendments don’t exist and want to restore Lochner. I’m glad they’re not willing to abuse their power to install a shitty comic book villain as dictator, but that’s a damn low bar.

Edited November 27, 2020 by wildcat09

[TwiceHorn 31529]

13 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I don’t think “they didn’t commit incredibly egregious election theft in a case in which they had literally no factual basis on which to justify it” warrants much praise. 

Given the tiny number of cases that make it to SCOTUS, the appellate courts have enormous power to push the law in some bad directions in ways that have a really harmful impact on millions of people and I think there’s pretty good reason to think Trump’s appointees will do that. 

We got lucky that the election wasn’t closer and that the ratfuckers were too lazy and incompetent this time to provide conservative judges with a prefectural justification. Trump’s appointees are still a bunch of federalist society goons that effectively believe the civil war amendments don’t exist and want to restore Lochner. I’m glad they’re not willing to abuse their power to install a shitty comic book villain as dictator, but that’s a damn low bar.

Maybe so.

But, you have to admit that a great deal of the fear of Trump appointees is that they are going to do Trump's bidding, period.  I have always believed that was severely overblown.

And your complaint about Trump nominees for the most part would apply to any conservative nominees, which is a different issue.  And I still maintain that, even for Supreme Court justice nominees that are "vetted to the hilt," there is a substantial chance that judges on the bench don't perform according to political expectations.

The worst thing about Trump's slate of appointees is the number of really marginally competent lower court appointees, and they probably won't do much permanent damage, but will be annoying and expensive for litigants.

Also, the real traveshamockery of the whole thing is the Garland deal, and similar obstructionism by McConnell that permitted Trump to fill so many vacancies.  Nonetheless, Obama managed 100 more appointments than Trump, granted in two terms.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Gil Bang 25999]

 

 

[Red Five 40881]

"No claims of fraud or illegal votes". 

So their legal strategy in court is basically "aww but c'mon! We want to win."

[TwiceHorn 31529]

6 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

 

Appears to be a whole new batch of lawyers.  No Thor, and I think he's been lead on most/all of the Michigan stuff to date.

American Freedumb Law Center is a new one.

[Js1 85527]

6 minutes ago, Red Five said:

"No claims of fraud or illegal votes". 

So their legal strategy in court is basically "aww but c'mon! We want to win."

“C’mon, you owe me” as if they wouldn’t have been nominated by a President Rubio/Cruz/Cotton/Hawley eventually 

[TwiceHorn 31529]

5 minutes ago, Js1 said:

“C’mon, you owe me” as if they wouldn’t have been nominated by a President Rubio/Cruz/Cotton/Hawley eventually 

Or even Romney or Jeb Bush in the past or a current alternative universe.

Godalmighty I hope Cotton is never elected.  He seems to be the intelligent version of Trump, but equally offputting and without the charisma for the dumbs.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Pato del Muerto 52571]

Are these official campaign court challenges purposefully ridiculous, so that trump can then claim they lost because of bad lawyering and not because of zero merit, thereby keeping the trumpers believing?  Once they have to move away from judicial activism from their own appointees and legislative activism from gop legislatures and elected officials, of course. 

[TwiceHorn 31529]

14 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Are these official campaign court challenges purposefully ridiculous, so that trump can then claim they lost because of bad lawyering and not because of zero merit, thereby keeping the trumpers believing?  Once they have to move away from judicial activism from their own appointees and legislative activism from gop legislatures and elected officials, of course. 

One of the problems I am beginning to see is that there is a potentially bottomless pool of plaintiffs for this kind of litigation:  individual voters, candidates, parties, electors, campaigns.  To a certain extent, a new plaintiff can bring up and rehash the same old shit over and over again, or put a slightly new spin on the same old shit.  It still ultimately probably won't go anywhere, but it's easier for a new plaintiff than it would be for the same one(s) from the last abortive lawsuit.

The pool of plaintiffs and their lawyers, especially when new ones get involved, have as hard a time as we do of keeping track of all the suits and their dispositions.

Of course, some or all of these plaintiffs are supported or controlled by the Trump campaign or the RNC or both, so it's ultra-cynical to keep rehashing this shit.

Edited November 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

I have to say, I've always loved Popehat's tweets. I have no idea what he's talking about half the time but nonetheless, his latest batch has me rolling. It's kinda sad from a we're a laughingstock to the world point of view but still....

Oh and for some reason, the tweets are loading slow today. Probably too much turkey on the intertrons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31529]

35 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

They’re ridiculous because good lawyers won’t take the case, and even the bad ones know they’ll be sanctioned if they try to claim in court all the ridiculous democracy-subverting lies they tell for the camera outside of court.

It’s no different than how our federal government has operated.   Everyone is trying to please a madman who wants the impossible and is too dumb to get why it’s impossible.   So, bottom of the barrel people just throw something together to appease him.  The first thing this Administration did was an unconstitutional ban on Muslim people entering the country that Stephen Miller scribbled on the back of a napkin.

This is probably the bottom line.  

Trump is a maniac that doesn't listen to people who know better.  Most lawyers would say "I won't take your money, this is a bad case."

But it isn't Trump's money and he either doesn't understand or refuses to understand and accept.

So here we are.

Unlike the government though, these lawdogs shouldn't owe Trump anything. Maybe they think the infamy of association with Trump causes will aid their practice.

[Horndog 2228]

2 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

 

 

Original filing in Michigan Supreme Court?

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13587]

With the 30 plus lawsuits filed in (I think) 5 states and needing tens of thousands of votes to be overturned, has there been a single case of anyone charged with voter fraud aiding Democrats yet this election? The only case I recall so far is a Trump voter who tried to vote a second time as his son but I honestly have no idea.

[Gil Bang 25999]

 

[AnTiM 1669]

As much as I despise Trump, I find it hard to believe that he does not know his lawsuits are a waste of time.  My concern is what in hell he is trying to cover up by keeping the public's attention on his lawsuits.

[Cairn Horn88 8280]

5 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah.  It's not loss-of-rights/malpractice bad, but pretty shoddy.

One of my bosses at my first firm made the point that as lawyers, we basically "sell our papers."  Therefore, they should always look decent and be free of obvious errors, because the client, at least, will judge us on that basis.

One of the most curious things, not blatantly wrong, is the paragraph numbers being centered and on a different line than the rest of the paragraph.  

As an appellate lawyer, and an apparently quite successful one, Sydney Powell lived and died by the quality of her briefs (that is really all courts of appeals look at), which would include formatting, grammar, and punctuation as well as more substantive content.  For an old hag like she is, she may have been reliant on a good secretary or assistant for the format, spelling, etc. of her papers and she may not have that anymore.

Or it may be another sign of her crumbling mental state.

So, you can’t use LOL and a couple of smiley faces?  I guess some attorneys take their briefs way too serious!

[pantone159 719]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

But, you have to admit that a great deal of the fear of Trump appointees is that they are going to do Trump's bidding, period.  I have always believed that was severely overblown.

It is obvious that Trump expected his judicial appointees to 'do him a favor' in return for appointing them, just like a mob boss would. I have been very happy to see that things do not actually work this way!

[elfenix 34331]

As much as I despise Trump, I find it hard to believe that he does not know his lawsuits are a waste of time.  My concern is what in hell he is trying to cover up by keeping the public's attention on his lawsuits.

I think quite a bit of this is that you have to keep filing lawsuits in order to keep the donations coming in that are funding his new PAC. Which he's going to be CEO of and pay himself from.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Just now, elfenix said:

28 minutes ago, AnTiM said:

As much as I despise Trump, I find it hard to believe that he does not know his lawsuits are a waste of time.  My concern is what in hell he is trying to cover up by keeping the public's attention on his lawsuits.

I think quite a bit of this is that you have to keep filing lawsuits in order to keep the donations coming in that are funding his new PAC. Which he's going to be CEO of and pay himself from.

The grift is the number one reason, IMO. That is always the Trump way.

However, is could also be a distraction to keep people looking thataway instead of over here as he and his cronies figure out how they're going to shut down the government in two and a half weeks and make it be Biden and the Democrat's fault.