The Kraken is here

SuperStringTheory said:
Nope, they ruled that the the use of different standards of counting in different counties violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

This case is not like that. It was not about equal protection or the US Constitution. It was about the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Click to expand...

He's a lawyer you know. I guess he just skipped the day they taught Constitutional law.

:rofl2::rofl2:
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yes I am.....are you two done showing everyone how little you know about the law?.....
Click to expand...

Are you? If you really are a lawyer, that's a pretty sad commentary. You didn't know the difference between state and Federal courts. I guess ambulance chasers don't need to know the difference. Let's recap. Your original claim was that the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would be taken to the Federal Appeals court. WRONG. Then you claimed the same thing was done in Bush v. Gore. WRONG. Then you quoted Marbury vs Madison without the basic understanding that Federal courts only review state court decisions when there is a constitutional controversy. Then you misstated the issue in Bush v. Gore. Congrats you got EVERYTHING wrong. But I'll but if you've been injured in an accident, you are the guy.

ROTLFMFAO!!! How sad.
 
Concart said:
Are you? If you really are a lawyer, that's a pretty sad commentary. You didn't know the difference between state and Federal courts. I guess ambulance chasers don't need to know the difference. Let's recap. Your original claim was that the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would be taken to the Federal Appeals court. WRONG. Then you claimed the same thing was done in Bush v. Gore. WRONG. Then you quoted Marbury vs Madison without the basic understanding that Federal courts only review state court decisions when there is a constitutional controversy. Then you misstated the issue in Bush v. Gore. Congrats you got EVERYTHING wrong. But I'll but if you've been injured in an accident, you are the guy.

ROTLFMFAO!!! How sad.
Click to expand...

Nothing funnier than Concart trying to save face. And just making himself look dumber than fuck.
 
coldjoint said:
How come George Bush lost all his cases against Al Gore until it went to the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the lack of evidence that Trump has presented? Nice attempt at a dodge. You failed. Where is the evidence?
 
coldjoint said:
How come George Bush lost all his cases against Al Gore until it went to the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

Completely different. Trump is saying there was fraud, but his lawyers have failed to present evidence in court. It's not that they presented evidence and the judge ruled against them, like in the 2000 election.
 
Concart said:
What does that have to do with the lack of evidence that Trump has presented? Nice attempt at a dodge. You failed. Where is the evidence?[/QUOTE]

The evidence is there judicial activists are stopping from being presented. The election is not the only thing that was, or is, rigged.
Click to expand...
 
Concart said:
You can't make the claim that it's illegal AFTER you know the result. So says the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. That's exactly what you wanted to do. Why do you hate free and fair elections?
Click to expand...

if the vote was not cast and tabulated in accordance with the laws set by the PA legislature BEFORE the election its always been illegal......why do you love illegal votes?.....
 
Concart said:
Are you? If you really are a lawyer, that's a pretty sad commentary. You didn't know the difference between state and Federal courts. I guess ambulance chasers don't need to know the difference. Let's recap. Your original claim was that the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would be taken to the Federal Appeals court. WRONG. Then you claimed the same thing was done in Bush v. Gore. WRONG. Then you quoted Marbury vs Madison without the basic understanding that Federal courts only review state court decisions when there is a constitutional controversy. Then you misstated the issue in Bush v. Gore. Congrats you got EVERYTHING wrong. But I'll but if you've been injured in an accident, you are the guy.
Click to expand...

sorry child.....but you are wrong and I am right.......it is as simple as that......
 
SuperStringTheory said:
I find it hard to believe, but if you are you are an ignorant one. A different case might be brought before the supreme court concerning Pennsylvania but it won't be this one.
Click to expand...
let's recap......two fuckwits said that state court decisions cannot be appealed to the SC.......I proved they were wrong......they countered with the argument that I was ignorant........they have currently dug their hole so deep they can no longer see what the argument was.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
let's recap......two fuckwits said that state court decisions cannot be appealed to the SC.......I proved they were wrong......they countered with the argument that I was ignorant........they have currently dug their hole so deep they can no longer see what the argument was.......
Click to expand...

No, i never said that. The case can't be appealed to federal court because the question raised is not about federal law or the federal constitution. I don't give a fuck what shitty school gave you a degree or what backwater licensed you, you are a know nothing moron.

https://www.findlaw.com/litigation/... person can go to,brought only in state court.

Federal courts may hear cases concerning state laws if the issue is whether the state law violates the federal Constitution. ...

A state-law-only case can be brought only in state court.

They would have to raise a different question, i.e., a different lawsuit, to be heard in federal court
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
if the vote was not cast and tabulated in accordance with the laws set by the PA legislature BEFORE the election its always been illegal......why do you love illegal votes?.....
Click to expand...

See, you show no hint of understanding what this case was about.

This case challenged the "law set by the PA legislature BEFORE the election" claiming it violated the state's constitution.

You are a fucking joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top