The Kraken is here

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...

They were cast in accordance with the laws set by the legislature. There is no dispute about that. You really don’t get it do you?
 
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 you didn’t say that. You said THIS case would be appealed to the Federal APPELLATE court. We corrected you. It cannot be. Why lie when the posts are right here, poser.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
sorry child.....but you are wrong and I am right.......it is as simple as that......
Click to expand...

On January 20th, we will know once and for all who is right and who is a fool. If you really believe what you are posting, you should look forward to definitive proof. But, we all know you are not. There is a portion of you that knows that your nonsense is just nonsense.

I am looking forward to January 20th. You are fearing it.
 
Concart said:
Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
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 you didn’t say that. You said THIS case would be appealed to the Federal APPELLATE court. We corrected you. It cannot be. Why lie when the posts are right here, poser.
Click to expand...

***cough***

Default
Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
and will now go to the federal appeals court
Click to expand...
Lol you’re a lawyer. What a joke. It was a fucking state case you moron. Seriously.
Click to expand...
 
Walt said:
On January 20th, we will know once and for all who is right and who is a fool. If you really believe what you are posting, you should look forward to definitive proof. But, we all know you are not. There is a portion of you that knows that your nonsense is just nonsense.

I am looking forward to January 20th. You are fearing it.
Click to expand...

we will know when the SC decides the cases or decides not to hear the cases......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you jumped in with both feet on his side......stop weaseling......
Click to expand...

BS. It's all right here. Post 285. I quoted back your cite of Martin v Hunter with emphasis on "arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States." The case does not claim any issue affecting the Constitution and laws of the United States. Feds don't have jurisdiction. Again, maybe they could repackage it to make such a claim, but it would be a different case.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
we will know when the SC decides the cases or decides not to hear the cases......
Click to expand...

There is a hard deadline on trump worshiper's delusions. We are past the de facto deadline, but we are rapidly approaching the hard deadline.

Even as every case is laughed out of court, even by Republican judges, trump worshipers are sure that the next case will go all the way to the Supreme Court, and be decided in their favor. The Supreme Court will not reverse the election, and it is too late for a case to be fully argued and get to them, but the trump worshipers are sure that I am a fool for believing that.

The Supreme Court will definitely not remove a sitting President. They have absolutely no authority to do that. While right now saying the Supreme Court will reverse the election seems delusional, there is no question that after January 20th it is absolutely delusional.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
***cough***
Click to expand...

Yes, you said EXACTLY what I claimed you said. Oops. State cases cannot be appealed to a Federal Appellate court. They can only be appealed to the Supreme Court if there is a FEDERAL constitutional issue. There is none. Which means this will not be appealed in any court anywhere. You are a poser. There's no way any lawyer would not know this. None.
 
SuperStringTheory said:
BS. It's all right here. Post 285. I quoted back your cite of Martin v Hunter with emphasis on "arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States." The case does not claim any issue affecting the Constitution and laws of the United States. Feds don't have jurisdiction. Again, maybe they could repackage it to make such a claim, but it would be a different case.
Click to expand...

please read #326 and correct your errors.....
 
SuperStringTheory said:
It was a state case, because it only raised issues with state law and the state constitution. That does not suggest that state court decisions cannot be appealed to the SC. They can IF they raise an issue involving US law or the US constitution. Is any of this getting through to you.

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

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

no.....a state law only case can still be in violation of the US constitution and if it is it will be subject to review by the SC......
 
Concart said:
Yes, you said EXACTLY what I claimed you said. Oops. State cases cannot be appealed to a Federal Appellate court. They can only be appealed to the Supreme Court if there is a FEDERAL constitutional issue. There is none. Which means this will not be appealed in any court anywhere. You are a poser. There's no way any lawyer would not know this. None.
Click to expand...

lol......so you admit federal courts can review state court decisions.....congratulations......you are now less stupid than you were yesterday.....
 
Concart said:
This case will be dismissed summarily. The judge will write a scathing rebuke of the plaintiffs for bringing a completely speculative lawsuit with absolutely no evidence. It is a disgrace.

Next?
Click to expand...

When will they start the state bar complaints and massive monetary sanctions for this vexatious baseless abuse of process?
It's Orley Taitz on steroids.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no.....a state law only case can still be in violation of the US constitution and if it is it will be subject to review by the SC......
Click to expand...

sigh...

If the question is whether the law violates the US Constitution then it is not "state-law-only CASE." It is quite clear that that is what the source is trying to convey, but you go to great lengths to misunderstand and remain a dumbass.

Again, the case in Pennsylvania includes no claim of any violation of the US Constitution.
 
Micawber said:
When will they start the state bar complaints and massive monetary sanctions for this vexatious baseless abuse of process?
It's Orley Taitz on steroids.
Click to expand...

Another fake lawyers showing his complete lack of legal knowledge. You and Concart must be inbred siblings.
 
SuperStringTheory said:
sigh...

If the question is whether the law violates the US Constitution then it is not "state-law-only CASE." It is quite clear that that is what the source is trying to convey, but you go to great lengths to misunderstand and remain a dumbass.

Again, the case in Pennsylvania includes no claim of any violation of the US Constitution.
Click to expand...

your backtracking is duly noted......next time just fuck off sooner.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top