Jump to content

the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

henrygandorf

By henrygandorf
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 10k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Bookman
Bookman

The rumor is that Alito and Thomas voted first, and then there was a dump of 7 votes. Texas expert says there’s only a 0.0039% chance of this happening.

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

Fuck Kayleigh and her headache and all the other enabling babysitters. I hope she hasn’t had a night with more than three hours of sleep for this entire year. I hope he texts her and calls her at al

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

40 plus indictments, guilty pleas, convictions, prison sentences, and roughly a dozen fed cases borne of said investigation is slightly more than jack shit.

Posted Images

Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105337

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

They are in front of Albright.

I suspect that they were performing a partisan calculus when they filed it there.  I don't think they performed a personal calculus of the kind of judge that Albright is.  I don't think this will go well for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bookman

Bookman 4642

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

I tried to read it but I gave up. I'd rather yank out all the hair from my armpits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A-Tex Devil

A-Tex Devil 2462

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

They are in front of Albright.

I suspect that they were performing a partisan calculus when they filed it there.  I don't think they performed a personal calculus of the kind of judge that Albright is.  I don't think this will go well for them.

Yeah.... it's going to get in the way of Albright's patent rocket docket.  He won't be pleased. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89799

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, NWBuck said:

I'm struck by the realization that the "let's look for backward messages in rock and roll songs" fascination absolutely primed these folks for "do your research" Q stuff, as did the bullshit that was "The Bible Code" and "The DaVinci Code".

And "THE SECRET" as seen Oprah Winfrey's show.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31536

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

They are in front of Albright.

I suspect that they were performing a partisan calculus when they filed it there.  I don't think they performed a personal calculus of the kind of judge that Albright is.  I don't think this will go well for them.

Actually, I have very little feel for what kind of judge Albright is despite actually knowing him as patent litigator.

He seems to be pretty transparently trying to turn Waco into a new Eastern District under the "new" patent venue rules.  But that's about as far as I can interpret it.

Pretty sure Walter Smith would hammer down on this.

I noticed from some of the PACER artifacts that no summons was requested here.  Given the difficulties of serving 550 someodd defendants, I wonder if they're even going to try.  Which on the one hand evidences the other than legitimate purposes of this litigation, and on the other hand may not sufficiently invoke the jurisdiction of the court to do anything but dismiss it after failure to serve all defendants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27589

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

How much does it cost to serve someone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31536

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

How much does it cost to serve someone?

Oh, $200 or so.  Maybe more if they are hard to track down.  There's a process by which you can ask them to "waive service" and voluntarily appear.  That works fine for a small number of "cooperative defendants" but would be a real pain in the ass to keep track of for that many.  And there's no "enforcement mechanism."

And you can't serve legislators at the capitol, I don't believe.  You'd have to catch them off capitol grounds.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31536

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Just out of curiosity, what would something like this cost?

Because the legislators can't be served at work, it would have to be at "home" after working hours and probably take more than one attempt, so let's guess $200 each.  DC is probably more.  $110k. Lmao.

Even if they all agreed to waive service, it would be a colossal pain in the ass, although little out of pocket cost.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105337

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Just out of curiosity, what would something like this cost?

I believe the correct answer, as always, is tree fiddy.

And, yeah, it would cost a shitload to serve them all.  Which is why they asked for a temporary restraining order without having to give notice to any defendant.

Albright is a smart, and very detail-oriented judge.  A rambling screed that doesn't actually state HOW the law was violated, provide any support for the requested remedy being appropriate, and dismisses the laches concern with an argument that is only - and I'm serious - "we couldn't know what was happening till we hired these lawyers"...is not likely to be well-received.

A general rule for practitioners: the more extraordinary and outrageous the remedy you request (and sometimes, such remedies are actually warranted), the more buttoned-up and unassailable your Complaint should be.  This...is not that.

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

Ghost of LL 15539

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That suit is an even bigger pile of dogshit than the Krakens.

It alleges violation of HAVA without ever specifying the provision of HAVA violated.

Standing problems.  Defendant problems.  Sanctions are coming for this one.

One thing, though.  They sued all 535 members of congress, plus other people.  They're going to have to serve them all.  And it won't probably be ripe for dismissal or sanctions until all 535+ have answered or formally defaulted.

You're exactly right that it is sanctionable.  And it's hard for me to interpret that pleading as anything other than a cry for help. 

I mean, I don't think a sober person files a facially frivolous pleading in federal court with a signature block that says "I got fired for my last gig for participating in a violent insurrection against the United States."  I really think there's a TLAP referral that needs to happen here.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SaucyJack

SaucyJack 3504

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Between Airforce flex-cuff guy w/ Horn helmet sticker, the Longhorn toboggan guy and this douchenozzle; the insurrection hasn't been a good look for us. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

R.I.P. Kracken

 

 

In Ron Burgundy voice: " We're back?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31536

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

R.I.P. Kracken

 

 

I just noticed something gloriously stupid about that. After I found the full document.

That is styled IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Well, cert hasn't been granted, so there's nothing to dismiss. And FRAP and 11th Circuit rules are inapplicable in the Supreme Court.

Maybe it was filed both places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

I went to law school but am not an attorney.  But I know one thing, if you want to be taken seriously by the U.S. Supreme Court........don't list your "mfi.net" email address on the cover page.  Your 1995 rural dial-up Florida email address likely indicates you probably don't have access to the case precedent on Westlaw.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think that's the brand of cigarettes Eric Trump got caught smoking in 7th grade.  PaMala's 100's, hard-pack.  

 

actually, if you read that sentence in Borat's voice, it makes perfect sense.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32428

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Mispelling!  Automatically invalidates the lawsuit!  I bet his flag has gold fringe on it, rendering the whole thing a farce!

God, we have so much stupid.

Good God, I had forgotten about the gold fringe on the flag thing.  QAnon before QAnon was a thing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kyrie Eleison

Kyrie Eleison 9312

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

So, what you're saying is.....if Trump manages to work his way into the office again, this guy is our new AG?

well yeah...except that he has the poors and isn't a lawyer (although...as an aside...being a licensed attorney is not a requirement for serving as Attorney General).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5125

Posted
Posted
On 1/19/2021 at 10:40 AM, TXSG8R said:

I need someone to connect the dots.  How would the 2020 election invalidate the congresspersons that weren't up for election exactly?  How would this lead to the entire congress being barred?

 

Something something, something something, reasons and something something.  Does that help?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89799

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Lobo said:

I went to law school but am not an attorney.  But I know one thing, if you want to be taken seriously by the U.S. Supreme Court........don't list your "mfi.net" email address on the cover page.  Your 1995 rural dial-up Florida email address likely indicates you probably don't have access to the case precedent on Westlaw.  

Holy shit, I was thinking "it's a 3-letter TLD, even if it's a .net, and a lot of people/businesses like short domain names since either you got it really early, or paid a lot", but that fucking website is straight out of the 1990s.

They could auction that domain name off for more than they probably pull in profit-wise in a year to two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105337

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Kyrie Eleison said:

that's one helluva prayer for relief they've got going...

Shoot for the moon, I say!

I mean....you also need to have a functioning weapon.....and aim.....so, yeah, that could be a challenge for them.  But who am I to shit on people who dream big?  That's America!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...