the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance

[tantric superman 4668]

7 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Squab sounds more gourmet 

[tantric superman 4668]

8 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

Just in case y'all are curious, there's a shitload of states and territories who've signed on to the District of Columbia's amici curiae filing. I am pleased as can be that North Carolina is among the states loyal to the United States Constitution.

D.C. and 22 states and territories' filing of amici curiae

Mad, I would have loved if they went with a different "collectively"...

....Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Washington(collectively, the “Non-Retard States”)

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

How long before the comparisons start--population numbers, GDP, etc.? One would think that would give the secession crowd pause, but they have decided they're in a boat parade aboard the Titanic Trump and that large slightly submerged object in the water is nothing to worry about because climate change doesn't exist, therefore icebergs don't break off and float either.

[Js1 87183]

1 minute ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

How long before the comparisons start--population numbers, GDP, etc.? One would think that would give the secession crowd pause, but they have decided they're in a boat parade aboard the Titanic Trump and that large slightly submerged object in the water is nothing to worry about because climate change doesn't exist, therefore icebergs don't break off and float either.

You give them too much credit. Trumpland would be a second world nation. The only thing keeping it from third world is Texas’ oil money and Florida’s tourist bucks. 

[Gatorubet 30720]

Just in case y'all are curious, there's a shitload of states and territories who've signed on to the District of Columbia's amici curiae filing. I am pleased as can be that North Carolina is among the states loyal to the United States Constitution.
D.C. and 22 states and territories' filing of amici curiae

Well written brief. Punches the best points on Federalism and calls bullshit on some fraud fact allegations - but limits that to issues of why the complaint is wanting under original jurisdiction.

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

15 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

How long before the comparisons start--population numbers, GDP, etc.? One would think that would give the secession crowd pause, but they have decided they're in a boat parade aboard the Titanic Trump and that large slightly submerged object in the water is nothing to worry about because climate change doesn't exist, therefore icebergs don't break off and float either.

Rewatch Rhett explaining pre-war why Scarlett's dear beaus are all headed off on a fool's errand. Ignoring facts is a long standing secessionist tradition. The South was doomed from the beginning, and no amount of Northern incompetence (of which there was plenty) could change the outcome.

[aggie08 21800]

Anytime now Supreme Court. The Pennsylvania case only took them half an hour of "deliberating" before dismissing. Hopefully, this means they're spending the time to pen a scathing reprimand.

[atomheartbevo 90650]

Somebody is either off their meds, or needs some.

 

[atomheartbevo 90650]

Did Trump just concede?  Or he wants the Supreme Court to completely reverse the election.  Both, of course it's both.

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by atomheartbevo

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

2 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Anytime now Supreme Court. The Pennsylvania case only took them half an hour of "deliberating" before dismissing. Hopefully, this means they're spending the time to pen a scathing reprimand.

Scathing is a long shot.  I think the Thomas’s of the court want to nurse the stupidity out there for partisan reasons.  If it is scathing, you’ll see an alarmist dissent in the other direction.  If it is a one sentence denial, more likely to be unanimous. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

Somebody is either off their meds, or needs some.

 

And if there is one thing I hold dearly, it’s RGB’s wishes!

[BradInATX 9208]

Trump trying to fear monger the Supreme Court justices like they're 9 of his usual trailer trash followers. It's all he knows.

[pyrohornIII 4846]

On 12/9/2020 at 4:20 PM, Mrs Whiggins said:

I'm going to cut to the chase here. Besides ending the "United" States, who is paying for all this lawyering and trialing and suing here? Is the answer us? Because I don't think this is a very fiscally responsible way to be spending our time. As a matter of fact, this ongoing jobs program for criminal and inept people pursuing vacuous and specious litigation is chapping my britches. And you don't want to be opposite Mrs. Whiggins when her britches are chapped. Tone doesn't even begin to cover it. I don't care about the manager, I'm heading for the boardroom.

The 50+ cases that lost were all on the plaintiff's (trump campaign) dime, right?  Do the states then have to file a civil suit to recover defense costs?  

But the Texas suit is funded by the state, can they also be charged for court expenses and whatever?   

Would be interesting to see a chart that tallies the costs of this bullshittery from both sides.  

10 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

While correct, there are many people who vote republican because (1) the dems will take more of their money away from them, (2) the dems will take their Muh guns away from them, or (3) the dems will kill babies.

While ignorant, there are millions who vote that way.  They are a minority, but they support the nazi Republican Party for those reasons alone. 

How to deal with that? Dunno. But that is what you are facing against. 

How to deal with it?  Imo, education is how you deal with it.  Scientific and critical thought education.  

9 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

Although it would clearly be for the best for this all to immediately dismissed with a scathing rebuke, a small part of me now hopes SCOTUS listens to oral argument so Cruz has his bluff called and has to actually represent them.  

And then he of course loses because his case is so absurd he would never have a chance no matter what he said, but not before he gets peppered mercilessly by the Justices in front of everyone.  And then I would hope the MAGATs blame Cruz for Trump losing and accuse him of throwing the case because he’s part of the Deep State, thereby ending his future political prospects and making him a pariah for the rest of his life.

Seems that when it fails, by dismissal or other means, and Cruz is tied to it as the lead litigator, he'll end up with egg on his face either way.   He either didn't get involved soon enough to lend his considerable constitutional knowledge to the cause, or that same knowledge was bogus all along.

14 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You give them too much credit. Trumpland would be a second world nation. The only thing keeping it from third world is Texas’ oil money and Florida’s tourist bucks. 

And SEC football revenue.   Oh wait...that's what enhances the third world mystique. 

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

1 minute ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Scathing is a long shot.  I think the Thomas’s of the court want to nurse the stupidity out there for partisan reasons.  If it is scathing, you’ll see an alarmist dissent in the other direction.  If it is a one sentence denial, more likely to be unanimous. 

This is where I sit with my prediction -- a clear legal rebuff that lawyers everywhere will know is a "don't do this shit again" statement, but with nothing that will be red meat for the zombie hordes.

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

1 minute ago, pyrohornIII said:

The 50+ cases that lost were all on the plaintiff's (trump campaign) dime, right? 

Trump campaign is about as likely to pay those bills as he has ever been to pay any bills at all. There's a reason every enterprise he undertakes eventually goes bankrupt -- you can only get people to extend credit so many times before they finally tell you to piss up a rope.

[Degenerate Gardner 4159]

25 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You give them too much credit. Trumpland would be a second world nation. The only thing keeping it from third world is Texas’ oil money and Florida’s tourist bucks. 

Let's not forget, Trump's America also absolutely owns the funnel cake industry.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

4 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

The 50+ cases that lost were all on the plaintiff's (trump campaign) dime, right?  Do the states then have to file a civil suit to recover defense costs?  

But the Texas suit is funded by the state, can they also be charged for court expenses and whatever?   

Would be interesting to see a chart that tallies the costs of this bullshittery from both sides.  

How to deal with it?  Imo, education is how you deal with it.  Scientific and critical thought education.  

Seems that when it fails, by dismissal or other means, and Cruz is tied to it as the lead litigator, he'll end up with egg on his face either way.   He either didn't get involved soon enough to lend his considerable constitutional knowledge to the cause, or that same knowledge was bogus all along.

And SEC football revenue.   Oh wait...that's what enhances the third world mystique. 

On attorneys fees (as opposed to costs of court, which are filing fees, deposition fees, expert witness fees), the usual rule is the "American rule," that each party bear their own costs and attorneys fees.

• More and more statutes give attorneys fees to the prevailing party, which would be other than Trumpco in 50 something out of 50 something plus one cases.
• However, I don't think there are any "fee shifting" statutes at play in most of these cases.   
• Generally, the trial court makes an award of fees at the time of entering judgment, or schedules a post-judgment period for considering the award of attorneys fees. 
• Whether government attorneys can recover attorneys fees on behalf of the government is an unsettled question because normally their salaries are a sunk cost.
• Without a fee-shifting statute, a court can award attorneys fees as a sanction for frivolous litigation or vexatious litigation tactics.

Those cases that  have been outright dismissed are ripe for any attorneys fees awards, either statutory or as a sanction.  I'm not aware of any so far.

A goodly number of the cases have yet to be outright dismissed or ended.  Trumpco's ridiculous injunctive relief has been denied, but the entire case has yet to be dismissed or otherwise disposed of.  Stay tuned, I guess.

[Eskimohorn 5682]

while i agree with your point about republicans, there is a separate point here about trump.
he can get 74mm votes.  i don't think another republican can.  he showed last month that he can get people out to vote for him.  these people are not all "republicans".  if josh hawley or mitt romney runs in 2024 they won't automatically get those 74mm votes, even if trump told them to do it (he won't).

Maybe, but Trump underperformed most all GOP Senators. And while Trump riled his base, he also triggered turnout against him.

There’s the primaries and the general. The issue is that Trump has loyalty among the remnants of the GOP and so can penalize GOP candidates. But he’s unpopular in general so if a Romney can get past the Primaries, he’ll have better luck in the General election.

But truthfully, the most scary thing about Trump, is that his bully pulpit speaks to disturbed individuals, hate groups, and disinformation bots. Thats why Trump makes cowards out of people. Because his adversaries become targets of hate speech, foreign cyber attacks, and domestic terrorists.

[Brisketexan 106899]

9 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

Maybe, but Trump underperformed most all GOP Senators. And while Trump riled his base, he also triggered turnout against him.

There’s the primaries and the general. The issue is that Trump has loyalty among the remnants of the GOP and so can penalize GOP candidates. But he’s unpopular in general so if a Romney can get past the Primaries, he’ll have better luck in the General election.

But truthfully, the most scary thing about Trump, is that his bully pulpit speaks to disturbed individuals, hate groups, and disinformation bots. Thats why Trump makes cowards out of people. Because his adversaries become targets of hate speech, foreign cyber attacks, and domestic terrorists.

That's important.  When you oppose many other GOP politicians, you end up having political opposition.  When you oppose Trump or any of his Anointed Apostles, you have enemies -- political, personal, and physical.  You didn't oppose a politician -- you crossed a crime family, with all of the expected consequences.

It's not insane that Trumpism exists.  What's insane is that the GOP meekly handed over the party to Trumpism, and now there's no turning back.

[SydneyCarton 49504]

12 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

Republicans are 30 to 35% of the country depending on the poll you look at so around 25% of the country thinks the election was stolen. Too many no doubt but not enough to go full Brisket 

I vacillate between your viewpoint and more dystopian ones. The counterpoint to you is that 30-35% of the country are receiving 50-60% of elected positions, including local/state/national level, and are misrepresentative of the citizens they represent in many cases. You say they aren't enough to actually do crazy things, but the more the more zealot like ones get elected without spine and ethics and then govern against the interests of their constituents, you can easily argue that is as much a recipe for widespread discontent and action as 30-35% of the country going full Meal Team Six and doing some stupid shit. It's a bad recipe, no matter which way you're coming at it from. 

[mdmost 44045]

His tweets today makes me think he knows the Supreme Court is about to reject his last minute hail mary out to half court. Now we'll get to watch him flail about and claim he's not leaving. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

Not surprised 

 

[jimmyjazz 47201]

Political yard sign anecdote:  prior to November 3, our neighborhood appeared heavily pro-Biden (> 95%) as determined by yard signs.

Now that we're in a city council runoff, yard signs are very close to 50/50 between the Trumpian candidate (Jennifer Virden) and the Democrat (Alison Alter).

Conclusion:  the "shy Trump voter" thing is real, at least in west Austin.

[A-Tex Devil 2500]

I likened this whole thing to a 1/16 seed NCAA tourney game where 16 seed puts scare in 1 seed . . . but you know 1 seed will win . . . but it's still a real scare. So I am nervous for some reason, but probably shouldn't be. 

It's not a completely apt analogy because this 16 seed (Trump) is down 35 points and the 1 seed is covering the spread.  But in this case, the 16 seed gets a 50 point full court shot opportunity.  

[Brisketexan 106899]

5 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Political yard sign anecdote:  prior to November 3, our neighborhood appeared heavily pro-Biden (> 95%) as determined by yard signs.

Now that we're in a city council runoff, yard signs are very close to 50/50 between the Trumpian candidate (Jennifer Virden) and the Democrat (Alison Alter).

Conclusion:  the "shy Trump voter" thing is real, at least in west Austin.

Correct.  And I also think this goes to the question of "does the 'defund the police' position cost dem/progressive candidates support?"  The key issue being pushed in this race is just that -- defund the police, public safety, etc., and Virden is picking up support based on that.  Bad Teammate has posted about how this position didn't cost any dem candidates a race, but I think in local races -- you know, where police forces are governed -- it's having an impact.

[Js1 87183]

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Correct.  And I also think this goes to the question of "does the 'defund the police' position cost dem/progressive candidates support?"  The key issue being pushed in this race is just that -- defund the police, public safety, etc., and Virden is picking up support based on that.  Bad Teammate has posted about how this position didn't cost any dem candidates a race, but I think in local races -- you know, where police forces are governed -- it's having an impact.

What the left has constantly underestimated / disavowed to their great sorry and perturbation is that there is no such thing as a "rational voter". All votes -- Every Last Damned One -- are emotional. And you've got to market accordingly. Defunding the police is actually one of the greatest single policy wonk positions there is, based on how resources need to be reallocated to social services, but it's a loser politically precisely because it shouldn't be "Defund the Police". It should be "Help the police! Pay more for MHMR!"

[mdmost 44045]

But if it pays off for the GOP, she'll be fine with it. 

I compare cowards like her in the GOP with good people in the GOP who believe in the rule of law like the poor elections official in Georgia who got death threats for simply doing his job BY THE LETTER OF THE LAW. 

[Brisketexan 106899]

Just now, Walden Ponderer said:

What the left has constantly underestimated / disavowed to their great sorry and perturbation is that there is no such thing as a "rational voter". All votes -- Every Last Damned One -- are emotional. And you've got to market accordingly. Defunding the police is actually one of the greatest single policy wonk positions there is, based on how resources need to be reallocated to social services, but it's a loser politically precisely because it shouldn't be "Defund the Police". It should be "Help the police! Pay more for MHMR!"

Messaging matters.  But don't tell that to the strident "progressive" voices like BT.  Even if it only costs you a small percentage of voters.....these races are often decided by 5-10%.  That percentage damned well matters.

It's an easy policy sale with a shitty, incomplete/inaccurate slogan.  And it's going to cost us 1-2 council seats in Austin to Trumpers/utter nutbars.

[DDD Dad 14650]

I likened this whole thing to a 1/16 seed NCAA tourney game where 16 seed puts scare in 1 seed . . . but you know 1 seed will win . . . but it's still a real scare. So I am nervous for some reason, but probably shouldn't be. 
It's not a completely apt analogy because this 16 seed (Trump) is down 35 points and the 1 seed is covering the spread.  But in this case, the 16 seed gets a 50 point full court shot opportunity.  

2018 UVA says hi.

[Js1 87183]

7 minutes ago, A-Tex Devil said:

I likened this whole thing to a 1/16 seed NCAA tourney game where 16 seed puts scare in 1 seed . . . but you know 1 seed will win . . . but it's still a real scare. So I am nervous for some reason, but probably shouldn't be. 

It's not a completely apt analogy because this 16 seed (Trump) is down 35 points and the 1 seed is covering the spread.  But in this case, the 16 seed gets a 50 point full court shot opportunity.  

This is basically a game where the 16 seed keeps missing shots and fouling the 1 seed at the end of the game down 20.  And now they're whining to the NCAA that the game played wasn't fair for "REASONS." But they can't tell you what those reasons are.

[DigDug 1738]

I think it’s safe to say, as soon as the decision comes in he will whine like a bitch then hit the the accelerator on the not so subtle dog whistles.

The bull horn will go out to all patriots and 2a defenders and American loving real Americans in America by God to Liberate America!

[Brisketexan 106899]

Just now, DigDug said:

I think it’s safe to say, as soon as the decision comes in he will whine like a bitch then hit the the accelerator on the not so subtle dog whistles.

The bull horn will go out to all patriots and 2a defenders and American loving real Americans in America by God to Liberate America!

You will 100% hear "liberate America!" from him after this, or some similar phrase using "liberate!"  It is a call to violent action, and is a crime against the United States.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

10 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Pick your shot:

I think we will have a unanimous short decision dismissing on standing. The option is two competing sides making the court seem even more political, with some nasty concurring/dissenting opinions that stray into multiple (unneeded) merit based issues. IOW, a shit-show.

Roberts gonna make them dismiss unanimously, leaving Trump to crow about why he lost on procedure, but his proof was bigly good. In return the mouth breathers do not get told they are stupid mooks, and are free to knee-cap Biden with that shit until 2024. And insane orange man is gone, and tax law still favorable, so big money is happy and safe.

The other intriguing aspect of this is that normal jurisdiction via certiorari weeds out dogshit cases.  If a case turns out to be stealth dogshit, they quietly dismiss as cert improvidently granted.

So, it's rather unusual that they have to look at a dogshit case at all.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

16 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Political yard sign anecdote:  prior to November 3, our neighborhood appeared heavily pro-Biden (> 95%) as determined by yard signs.

Now that we're in a city council runoff, yard signs are very close to 50/50 between the Trumpian candidate (Jennifer Virden) and the Democrat (Alison Alter).

Conclusion:  the "shy Trump voter" thing is real, at least in west Austin.

Anecdote: Most of my friends who voted for Trump loved to talk about it, had yard signs, participated in boat parades etc.. My friends who were Biden voters were more reserved about discussing politics publicly. In the small universe I exist in, it was the shy Biden voter. Biden voters are what Trump's base would refer to as the silent majority, when ironically they themselves ended up being the obnoxious minority (no racist). 

[27-25 2085]

11 hours ago, Shaggy3.0 said:

Thanks for the simple explanation. Not sure I understand this whole "legacy" thing.  Why should that be a factor? 

I'm trying to compare this situation with the software development process, as crazy as that sounds.  Over time, a code base can become extremely convoluted and/or huge monoliths for various reasons. Shitty programmers touch the code and create regressions. Moron IT contractors develop untested modules and break the build. Business rushes projects through with unreasonable timelines.  These issues usually surface with large enterprise projects in poorly managed groups.  One solution is to acknowledge and fix the questionable architectural decisions,  peer-review code going forward, and remove legacy code that prevents better coding practices.  A large code refactoring project  is usually the next step.  Refactoring allows teams to correct previous mistakes and move forward in a constructive manner.

When it comes to law, I guess there is a similar problem. Every year more decisions are made by all levels of the judiciary.  And every year, as more cases are decided, it exposes laws to contradictions IMHO.  Perhaps logical paths for what the current law actually is reveal themselves, but might get drowned out by previous contradictory rulings.  I read all those motions today.  They read like a free-for-all to cite the most cases to support either side.  Then I read online sources, watch the news, read various opinions---and this shit is all over the place. And this reminds me of those large codebases full of problems. But in software, we can refactor to solve our problems.  The IT VP and Directors who created the issues---we can't worry about their "legacy".  Things just need to be fixed properly. So they give the go-ahead to fix all the issues.  Does the law have this ability to basically refactor itself? And again,  why the hell should I care about the legacy of some Chief Justice?  I can't even name previous Chief Justices because well, that's not my field. So why should the average person care about that? 

Pos rep for working the word refactoring into Cloak Room.

[jimmyjazz 47201]

13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Correct.  And I also think this goes to the question of "does the 'defund the police' position cost dem/progressive candidates support?"  The key issue being pushed in this race is just that -- defund the police, public safety, etc., and Virden is picking up support based on that.  Bad Teammate has posted about how this position didn't cost any dem candidates a race, but I think in local races -- you know, where police forces are governed -- it's having an impact.

If you got a door hanger from Virden, and haven't burned it yet, check out her garbled messaging on the "defund the police" movement.  It's difficult to parse which side of the issue she's on unless you know her background.  Way to go, Jennifer.  You took what could be a home run talking point (because of the movement's idiotic naming) and confused things enough to where plenty of uninformed voters won't actually know where you stand.

[Slacks 7063]

4 minutes ago, 27-25 said:

Pos rep for working the word refactoring into Cloak Room.

I'm a little disappointed that "technical debt" wasn't in there, but the effort was solid.

[Bozo_Casanova 26851]

24 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Political yard sign anecdote:  prior to November 3, our neighborhood appeared heavily pro-Biden (> 95%) as determined by yard signs.

Now that we're in a city council runoff, yard signs are very close to 50/50 between the Trumpian candidate (Jennifer Virden) and the Democrat (Alison Alter).

Conclusion:  the "shy Trump voter" thing is real, at least in west Austin.

Local issues matter. Over in Hyde park they have "we believe" signs next to "Code Next Wrecks Austin" signs. Cognitive dissonance is a thing

[Brisketexan 106899]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If you got a door hanger from Virden, and haven't burned it yet, check out her garbled messaging on the "defund the police" movement.  It's difficult to parse which side of the issue she's on unless you know her background.  Way to go, Jennifer.  You took what could be a home run talking point (because of the movement's idiotic naming) and confused things enough to where plenty of uninformed voters won't actually know where you stand.

Oh, the relentless calls and texts from her campaign make it clear -- Alison Alter wants us to get raped in our homes by criminals, Virden backs our brave cops.

[atomheartbevo 90650]

19 minutes ago, DigDug said:

I think it’s safe to say, as soon as the decision comes in he will whine like a bitch then hit the the accelerator on the not so subtle dog whistles.

The bull horn will go out to all patriots and 2a defenders and American loving real Americans in America by God to Liberate America!

He’s about to head to Mar-a-Lago for the holidays, and he won’t be coming back to DC.

[Biff Tannen 46166]

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You will 100% hear "liberate America!" from him after this, or some similar phrase using "liberate!"  It is a call to violent action, and is a crime against the United States.

And not fuck all will be done about it.

[atomheartbevo 90650]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

And not fuck all will be done about it.

1234.  These people would have been out and starting shit before now.

[Js1 87183]

Resign then, cowards. 

[HenryJames 67366]

 

[Biff Tannen 46166]

10 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

1234.  These people would have been out and starting shit before now.

You're probably right, but I was actually referring to the "crime against the United States" part.

[Brisketexan 106899]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Resign then, cowards. 

This.  A few generations ago, people your age spent years overseas getting shot at for their country.  You can resign your shitty job and give up some happy hours at the Old Ebbitt Grill (which is a bummer -- great oysters).  We are a nation of gutless fucking cowards.  And ironically, the party that yells "PATRIOT EAGLE FREEDOM GUN I WOULD DIE FOR 'MURICA!" loudly at every opportunity holds the greatest concentration of such cowards.

[HornOnTheBayou 9062]

39 minutes ago, A-Tex Devil said:

I likened this whole thing to a 1/16 seed NCAA tourney game where 16 seed puts scare in 1 seed . . . but you know 1 seed will win . . . but it's still a real scare. So I am nervous for some reason, but probably shouldn't be. 

It's not a completely apt analogy because this 16 seed (Trump) is down 35 points and the 1 seed is covering the spread.  But in this case, the 16 seed gets a 50 point full court shot opportunity.  

I was thinking of it like a #1 seed who is going to get a comfortable win over the 16, but looked real sloppy in the process and lost one of their key starters to injury during the game. If they play like this in the next game, they could easily lose to the 8 seed. Even if they make it past the second round, there's no way they're making it to the Final Four. Bottom line, Trump the person is done. Trumpism is going to end up eventually destroying this country. It might not be in 2024 or 2028, but it will happen.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

11 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Yeah, as has been noted before, so much of this shit is so ludicrous and counterfactual that it's actually difficult to prove falsity.

It's like everyone knows that the moon is not made of green cheese, but only a dozen people have personal knowledge of that fact.  So if you have a fucktard coming into court screaming "it's made of green cheese" and you can't get one of the surviving moonwalkers to counter that, you're just kind of fucked.

Like so many other things Trump, it's just a tar baby.  Trying to engage on a factual basis only leads to getting mired in the nonsense.

Edited December 11, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Brisketexan 106899]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, as has been noted before, so much of this shit is so ludicrous and counterfactual that it's actually difficult to prove falsity.

It's like everyone knows that the moon is not made of green cheese, but only a dozen people have personal knowledge of that fact.

Like so many other things Trump, it's just a tar baby.  Trying to engage on a factual basis only leads to getting mired in the nonsense.

So much this.

I've actually used a similar argument in court at times: "your honor, I looked, and there's no case law standing for the principle that gravity makes things fall.  That's because in the history of our courts, nobody has ever raised the ludicrous contrary position so that a court was actually required to hold that gravity is real and makes things fall.  Just like there is no case law holding that [plaintiff's theory is nutso].  Don't mistake the irrational novelty of plaintiff's argument here for any merit.  There is none."

Any judge who has been out in the practicing world for any period of time knows that type of situation, and understands exactly how to rule.