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

Bullneck

Bullneck 19206

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

With millions in donations, and top notch lawyers like Powell, giuilaini, and briscoe Cain, why is it taking so long for Powell to pull together her case and evidence?

Like tucker, I can’t wait to hear more about the biggest scandal in US history.

Step 1 is move those millions into an offshore trust.  That takes time.  Duh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13523

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Sidney Powell is saying thousands received bribes with no proof. Seems legit.

It's also confusing that the DOJ is not getting involved with the largest crime against the Constitution in the 200+ year history of the US. The DOJ wanted to get involved with personal cases of the President Trump, like rape accusation, but they seem strangely silent on crimes against democracy. 

Thank God that we have Sidney Powell and Rudy Guiliani to protect America. They're up there with Washington, Franklin, Lincoln and FDR.  I just can't decide if they quite make the Top 5 in greatest Americans or not. Easily they make the top 10. Easily.

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31534

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Sen. Joe McCarthy had a list of 200+ Communists that infiltrated the federal depts as well. The public is still waiting on that list to be released.  70 years later.

This, McCarthyism, is the closest analogy I can come up with as far as unquestioning obeisance to a political figure with an increasingly insane narrative.

We need more Joe Welches.

film-anatomy-of-a-murder-still-2.png

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BearSchlong

BearSchlong 8110

Posted
Posted
It's also confusing that the DOJ is not getting involved with the largest crime against the Constitution in the 200+ year history of the US. The DOJ wanted to get involved with personal cases of the President Trump, like rape accusation, but they seem strangely silent on crimes against democracy. 
Thank God that we have Sidney Powell and Rudy Guiliani to protect America. They're up there with Washington, Franklin, Lincoln and FDR.  I just can't decide if they quite make the Top 5 in greatest Americans or not. Easily they make the top 10. Easily.
The election isn't even a water cooler topic of discussion in the US Attorneys office for the District of Oregon.

Hatch act. Actual public servants respect it.

My ex wife's current husband was actually investigated (it made the MSM) for a very colorful and hateful violation in the early '00s. No prosecution though. I'd doxx him but he's a decent stepfather to my kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52586

Posted
Posted

So here we are almost 3 weeks past Election Day, and Sidney Powell is still saying she’s “told” there’s evidence of wrongdoing.

if there was evidence of wrongdoing, they’d have it in hand by now and would have presented it in court for legal scrutiny. 
 

all they have are a stack of solicited, unverified affidavits that are mostly grievances like someone said something mean to me or hearsay. 
 

why go to court with nothing when you have something?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SameSame

SameSame 1705

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

what's wrong with Sidney Powell's voice? Is she like 95? 

Brain worms and malice are a bad combo.

I thought she sounded like the girl from Theranos who would purposely fake a deep voice.  

Edited by SameSame
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85563

Posted
Posted
Just now, Pato del Muerto said:

So here we are almost 3 weeks past Election Day, and Sidney Powell is still saying she’s “told” there’s evidence of wrongdoing.

if there was evidence of wrongdoing, they’d have it in hand by now and would have presented it in court for legal scrutiny. 
 

all they have are a stack of solicited, unverified affidavits that are mostly grievances like someone said something mean to me or hearsay. 
 

why go to court with nothing when you have something?

It’s the grift, baby!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31534

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

what's wrong with Sidney Powell's voice? Is she like 95? 

Brain worms and malice are a bad combo.

For starts. she's getting up there, 65ish, so she has the faltering voice of the senior citizen.  Second, she's from NC, so she has that sort of rounded, tailing off accent and speech that combines with being an old to make it really quavery.  Third, brain worms.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13523

Posted
Posted

There are so many qanon rumors swirling around these circles, including Powell, they truly cannot distinguish between actuals facts and internet rumors. Coming up with a rumor that Hugo Chavez owned or started the Dominion company is nuts.  I gather some of it comes from internet rumors that a supposed ex-Venezuelan military officer made the claim. 

Who knew that Chavez was an actually an IT start-up entrepreneur and not a socialist leader. amazing.

You know that when the camera is off, those OAN or Newsmax anchors are laughing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13523

Posted
Posted (edited)

non-lawyer here but maybe some can help me. The delusional Trump fans (TexAgs, facebook) are claiming that Powell is waiting for the Appeals court to submit evidence. I thought that appeals courts were more about appealing a decision by the earlier judge and not a point of introducing evidence. Do you really walk into the Supreme Court and call witnesses?  "Chief Justice Roberts, I call Miss Vito to the stand to give expert rebuttal testimony about cars."

on a side note, you know Powell is in trouble when TexAgs are starting to have more people laugh at her then support her. It's now about 50-50 when as late as last week it was 90-10 supporting her.  It's still 90% that want to her to succeed but most Ags are now realizing that she's using Parler to get evidence.

Edited by Nice Guy Eddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31534

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

non-lawyer here but maybe some can help me. The delusional Trump fans (TexAgs, facebook) are claiming that Powell is waiting for the Appeals court to submit evidence. I thought that appeals courts were more about appealing a decision by the earlier judge and not a point of introducing evidence. Do you really walk into the Supreme Court and call witnesses?  "Chief Justice Roberts, I call Miss Vito to the stand to give expert rebuttal testimony about cars."

on a side note, you know Powell is in trouble when TexAgs are starting to have more people laugh at her then support her. It's now about 50-50 when as late as last week it was 90-10 supporting her.  It's still 90% that want to her to succeed but most Ags are now realizing that she's using Parler to get evidence.

That is correct.  Almost no evidence that was not before the trial court will be considered on any appeal.  An appeal is conducted on the basis of the "trial record," the transcript of proceedings and testimony, the evidence offered and entered into evidence as exhibits, and the pleadings and motions on file.    That trial record is static and is fixed, for the most part, before an appeal is ever commenced.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4062

Posted
Posted

 

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

That is correct.  Almost no evidence that was not before the trial court will be considered on any appeal.  An appeal is conducted on the basis of the "trial record," the transcript of proceedings and testimony, the evidence offered and entered into evidence as exhibits, and the pleadings and motions on file.    That trial record is static and is fixed, for the most part, before an appeal is ever commenced.

Hell I’m not a lawyer and I know that’s how it works in the SC. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding that the only way they could introduce new evidence is if the grounds for appeal include within it a claim that their evidence was unlawfully blocked in the original trial. Again I could be wrong, but that did not happen here. Quite the opposite. They were explicitly told that they literally introduced no evidence to support their claims. They can’t just walk into any appeals court saying “well we didn’t have evidence before but now we do.” That just sounds more and more like Trump supporters pretending to know how things work and getting indignant because they cannot for the life of them understand why they do not work that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52586

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Well golly, why haven't they submitted all of their evidence then? Probably just an oversight. 

Getting all the obama appointed judges and trump appointed turncoat judges on record as co-conspirators before filing with the supreme court of the United States with all the real gathered evidence. 

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

Brisketexan 105311

Posted
Posted
That is correct.  Almost no evidence that was not before the trial court will be considered on any appeal.  An appeal is conducted on the basis of the "trial record," the transcript of proceedings and testimony, the evidence offered and entered into evidence as exhibits, and the pleadings and motions on file.    That trial record is static and is fixed, for the most part, before an appeal is ever commenced.

Yep. That’s why, at the trial court, you’ll hear lawyers use the phrase “I need to make my record.” We MUST get any evidence or facts that we want considered at the appellate level into the record at the trial court level. Note that the evidence doesn’t have to be admitted - it just has to be in there. Even testimony. In Texas, if the judge says “I’m not going to let your witness testify about X,” but you need that in the record for the appeal, you submit a “bill of review.” “Your honor, may I make my bill?” And at that point, with the jury out of the room, you get the questions and answers into the record.

If you get to the court of appeals WITHOUT that, and you try to say “here’s the evidence that wasn’t presented at trial,” the court of appeals will ask “cool...did you make a bill?” I actually saw a poor, inexperienced criminal defense lawyer get hosed at argument on appeal of that exact issue.

By and large, if it’s not in the trial court record, the court of appeals is never going to consider it.
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52586

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, hpslugga said:

 

Hell I’m not a lawyer and I know that’s how it works in the SC. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding that the only way they could introduce new evidence is if the grounds for appeal include within it a claim that their evidence was unlawfully blocked in the original trial. Again I could be wrong, but that did not happen here. Quite the opposite. They were explicitly told that they literally introduced no evidence to support their claims. They can’t just walk into any appeals court saying “well we didn’t have evidence before but now we do.” That just sounds more and more like Trump supporters pretending to know how things work and getting indignant because they cannot for the life of them understand why they do not work that way.

It can’t be incompetence, must be part of a grander plan. Trust the process. There’s no way I could be fooled so badly, I’m too smart for that to happen. 

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

hpslugga 4062

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Yep. That’s why, at the trial court, you’ll hear lawyers use the phrase “I need to make my record.” We MUST get any evidence or facts that we want considered at the appellate level into the record at the trial court level. Note that the evidence doesn’t have to be admitted - it just has to be in there. Even testimony. In Texas, if the judge says “I’m not going to let your witness testify about X,” but you need that in the record for the appeal, you submit a “bill of review.” “Your honor, may I make my bill?” And at that point, with the jury out of the room, you get the questions and answers into the record.

If you get to the court of appeals WITHOUT that, and you try to say “here’s the evidence that wasn’t presented at trial,” the court of appeals will ask “cool...did you make a bill?” I actually saw a poor, inexperienced criminal defense lawyer get hosed at argument on appeal of that exact issue.

By and large, if it’s not in the trial court record, the court of appeals is never going to consider it.

Thank you.

Has the Trump team made any meaningful bills, or are they really just in there acting a fool as they’ve been portrayed in the media as doing so?

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...