Into the Night
Verified User
Why?
Texas sues Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania over election fraud
- Thread starter Bigdog
- Start date
Why?
Definitively no, but with yesterday being Harbor Day and Trump losing in all of his legal challenges, the writing is on the wall, only a bitter self serving individual would break from Presidential tradition and still deny the obvious
Or as Trump himself put it in 2016 regarding Jill Stein's lawsuits, “This is a scam, and the results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused, which is exactly what Jill Stein is doing to fill her coffers with money, most of which she will never even spend on this ridiculous recount"
Here we go with the phrasing again, I'll play:
Wrong, disposed in half hour (https://apnews.com/article/high-court-reject-gop-bid-halt-biden-win-0b7005328243eeca23f8bc3368549879)
Right, a Trump loyalist and devoted defender suddenly on his own decides to launch a lawsuit on his own and get it to the SCOTUS without outside aid in a matter of weeks, want to buy a bridge
And the lawsuit is history, it is not pending (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...trumps-favorite-house-members/article/2612398 )
And once again
The evidence not the case, the case is based upon a collection of fabrications that have been tossed in numerous other Trump lawsuits
Sure has, yesterday's SCOTUS embarrassment was based on some of the same "evidence" that is central to the Texas case
Wrong again, the Trump effort to overturn the election thru litigation is now numbering in the fifties, and only a half dozen or so are still alive, rest have losers (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...fight-includes-over-30-lawsuits-it-s-n1248289)
"Can" if there are any, but to date, there has only been one case to reach the Court and it was dismissed in half hour
Even when breaking it down in phrases you are still incorrect, but feel free to try again
It has power to enforce the PA constitution to guarantee a free and fair election. Executives have discretion in administering laws through executive orders when conditions necessitate.
Does the Supreme Court have the power to delay the Dec 14 date for electors to meet as requested in the Texas lawsuit?
Supreme Court rejects bid to overturn Pennsylvania result
"The Supreme Court’s order was all of one sentence, and there were no noted dissents."
They have lost legal challenges in six states. They have not yet agreed to hear the Texas case (and probably will not).
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55243008
Because Texas has no disputes with those states which is the basis for bringing a lawsuit under the original jurisdiction of the SC. And, Texas has no authority to challenge the election laws of other states.
Into the Night
Verified User
Trump is not losing his legal challenges. His lawsuit in the Supreme Court is still pending. He also joining the Texas lawsuit. That is not filed by Trump, and includes 17 States.
It is quite obvious that election fraud occurred. Yet you still deny it. There are videos. There are hundreds of witnesses. There is the problems with the Dominion software. There is election officials blatantly denying federal court order. There is probability math. There is obvious that election fraud occurred quite probably affecting millions of votes.
It is quite obvious that the election in these four States named as defendants has faulted.
Irrelevance fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Fake News. It is still pending.
BartenderElite
Verified User
Everything listed there has been debunked, and we saw the star witness for Rudy's team.
The opposite is actually true: there was obviously NO election fraud. We've never had things so scrutinized, and over 50 cases have been laughed out of court.
Into the Night
Verified User
Saying the same lies does not make them true.
Witness testimony is not a fabrication, dude. The videos of problems in the election offices are not fabrications. Neither is probability math. Neither is the behavior and capabilities of the Dominion software.
Both lawsuits are still pending.
Trump never filed fifty lawsuits. Argument from randU fallacy.
Argument from randU fallacy.
Fake News.
It was not dismissed. It is still pending.
Quoting Fake News does not make it true.
Into the Night
Verified User
Yes.
Into the Night
Verified User
Fake News. The lawsuit is still pending. Do you really think the Supreme Court is going to ignore 17 States suing these four States?
Into the Night
Verified User
It is not challenging the election laws of any State. It does have a dispute which is the basis for bringing the lawsuit in the Supreme Court. See Articles II and III.
NiftyNiblick
1960s Chick Magnet
Only if it proceeds in accordance with the law.
Into the Night
Verified User
No. You cannot debunk a witness without showing they are committing perjury. You cannot debunk hundreds of witnesses. You cannot debunk the presence of the Dominion software, it's operating manuals, or it's capabilities. You cannot debunk probability math. You cannot debunk a federal court order.
There are hundreds of them.
You can't wish away the evidence.
They weren't. Observers were kicked out of election offices while counting continued. Windows to the election offices were boarded up at that time. What are they hiding?
Trump never filed anywhere near 50 cases. Care to bid higher? One random number from you or the Fake News is as useless as any other.
Into the Night
Verified User
You deny the law.
If the PA Supreme Court does not have the power to modify state election laws because that is the job of the state legislature, then it is only logical that the U. S. Supreme Court does not have the power to modify federal election laws because that is the function delegated to the U. S. Congress
They have no standing to challenge the election laws of other states. The Constitution gives those powers to the states. They have sued under the constitutional provision regarding disputes between states, this dispute is within each state.