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

Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52557

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


What’s fantastic is that they don’t understand that there are human beings who won’t utterly betray their country for money. THEY would (and have)....so they assume that everyone else is like them.

We’re not. You guys are shitbags.

I don’t think you understand. 
129667751_10219719023949375_242996212334

all these things have been confirmed!

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27583

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Walden Ponderer said:

So we're less than an hour away from the start of Safe Harbor Day. I'm wondering what kind of celebration would be appropriate. Clearly we need a nautical theme... Lobster bisque, maybe? I know dessert should be simple, just cookies and milk. Black-and-whites, of course.

With plenty of red whine.

image.gif.dd2984c4c4cc4cc2743ddae5a3f922d5.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31521

Posted
Posted
Just now, Biff Tannen said:

Explain safe harbor day again please. 

If a state, by its own procedures, has certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day, it is conclusive.

No further proceedings, in federal court or elsewhere, may affect or change that slate of electors.

What happens if a state has not certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day is not clear.  I think it's known to legal scholars as a complete clusterfuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pato del Muerto

Pato del Muerto 52557

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Lord I definitely don’t keep up with the right wing fever dreams. I haven’t heard of half of this shit. Is this what they are peddling on OAN and the like?

Don’t know, I don’t deal with those places. This came from Facebook today, despite the “update” being from 4 weeks ago (so yes they confirmed all of this within a week of Election Day), from a guy who said he was bailing on Facebook and deleting his account in favor of parlor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85496

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

If a state, by its own procedures, has certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day, it is conclusive.

No further proceedings, in federal court or elsewhere, may affect or change that slate of electors.

What happens if a state has not certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day is not clear.  I think it's known to legal scholars as a complete clusterfuck.

Like 47 states have certified already. I think it’s just like Hawaii, NJ and Missouri or something. Biden is over 270 amongst the certified states. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Dog

The Dog 44105

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

What happens if a state has not certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day is not clear.  I think it's known to legal scholars as a complete clusterfuck.

Not exactly - it's just if you hit the date then it just means that the determination from the election is now protected by federal law:

Quote

Under the law, Congress must count the electoral votes from states that chose their electors and resolve any legal disputes over the choices by the act's deadline, which is six days before the electors meet to vote. Of course, if a state fails to meet the safe harbor deadline but chooses its electors by Dec. 14, Congress can still count the votes.

Good article on the safe harbor deadline: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/what-safe-harbor-day-why-it-s-bad-news-trump-n1250205

Also, note this about Pennsylvania:

Quote

Federal court cases remain active in Pennsylvania, but the general view among election law specialists is that the mere filing of a federal lawsuit wouldn't block a state's achieving safe harbor status, unless a judge had required the state to take steps that would delay its choice of electors.

So it appears at least Pennsylvania will be able to achieve safe harbor status even though there are court cases pending. The Trump campaign has exhausted all attempts through state courts. 

Edited by The Dog
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mole

Mole 4333

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

If a state, by its own procedures, has certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day, it is conclusive.

No further proceedings, in federal court or elsewhere, may affect or change that slate of electors.

What happens if a state has not certified a slate of electors by safe harbor day is not clear.  I think it's known to legal scholars as a complete clusterfuck.

I'm not a lawyer, but I may have filed a case with the Supreme Court. Based on my extensive research on Google Translate, I think the proper legal term is quam habuerit botrum portassent.  At least, this is what I would have used in all of my hypothetical filings.

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

Gil Bang 25993

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Mole said:

I'm not a lawyer, but I may have filed a case with the Supreme Court. Based on my extensive research on Google Translate, I think the proper legal term is quam habuerit botrum portassent.  At least, this is what I would have used in all of my hypothetical filings.

IIRC my latin correctly, that translates to "he who smelt it, dealt it".

  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38130

Posted
Posted

The legal question I have about the state harbor deadline is even though all these states have certified their results, do state with “open” legal cases achieve safe harbor status? 

It won’t matter once the electors vote on the 14th

but let’s say some crazy shit happens and Trump sends his own electors to vote. (I think most state law disallows this but whatever) 

Could they argue that because there were open legal disputes, no safe harbor status was obtained? 

This might be too deep into election law shit. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Exposition

Exposition 93

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

The legal question I have about the state harbor deadline is even though all these states have certified their results, do state with “open” legal cases achieve safe harbor status? 

It won’t matter once the electors vote on the 14th

but let’s say some crazy shit happens and Trump sends his own electors to vote. (I think most state law disallows this but whatever) 

Could they argue that because there were open legal disputes, no safe harbor status was obtained? 

This might be too deep into election law shit. 

 

 

This guy does a good job discussing what would happen if competing electors are sent. It's 50 minutes long but a good listen if you're interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6sVow9l8H4

Competing electors would result in the Governor of the state in question deciding which set of electors will count. Both PA and MI have Democrat Governors. 

Also he addresses my main concern which was some type of Republican fuckery during the January 6th joint session of Congress where they count the EC votes. The House has more power than the Senate during this process and if there's any funny business, Pelosi has the ability to stalemate the process. Which will result in President Pelosi on January 20th at noon since she's third in line. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31521

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, The Dog said:

Not exactly - it's just if you hit the date then it just means that the determination from the election is now protected by federal law:

Good article on the safe harbor deadline: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/what-safe-harbor-day-why-it-s-bad-news-trump-n1250205

Also, note this about Pennsylvania:

So it appears at least Pennsylvania will be able to achieve safe harbor status even though there are court cases pending. The Trump campaign has exhausted all attempts through state courts. 

That's accurate.  What I meant was if there was still some form of dispute going on in the state after safe harbor day.

It's still very possible for a state to submit its electors, but if someone is being a jackhole about it then it has the potential to be a clusterfuck.

As mentioned, the governor gets to decided among competing slates of electors according to the law, but I can see court shenanigans and other shit trying to interfere with that.

The law is https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/chapter-1

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

DFWTexEx 278

Posted
Posted

I was coming here to post or ask about the Texas lawsuit.  So embarrassing.  Clearly an attempt to relitigate everything at the Supreme Court.  I can't imagine SCOTUS even blinking an eye at this, but it is an interesting jurisdictional move to simply bypass everything by creating a state vs. state action.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85496

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DFWTexEx said:

I was coming here to post or ask about the Texas lawsuit.  So embarrassing.  Clearly an attempt to relitigate everything at the Supreme Court.  I can't imagine SCOTUS even blinking an eye at this, but it is an interesting jurisdictional move to simply bypass everything by creating a state vs. state action.

So California should sue all the red states who suppress the vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21834

Posted
Posted

Texas has lost the right to rip on Oklahoma, Arkansas, etc. what a fucking embarrassment. It’s not some wacko like Powell or Rudy but your fucking state attorney general. What a disgusting tactic to get straight to scotus. If the court rules in favor of Texas it’s time for another civil war and I’m not fucking joking.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85496

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Can someone quickly point out the craziest of the crazy in the TX filing?  I ain’t got time to go through 154 pages of Paxton’s bullshit.

SCOTUS needs to stop the Dec 14 count so they can find the fraud that they don’t acknowledge exists in any other filing and then have republican legislatures appoint the electors

But they only picked states with GOP legislatures for some odd reason 

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...