First of all, this community is a lot of fun, it really is a 24/7 Trump rally, and I love that about it. Secondly, it is obvious now more than ever, that media companies, whether they be the MSM or smaller news sites and bloggers, all have one goal, and that is to make money, so please keep that in mind.
As an attorney, I have a certain view of the world and I have learned to be a realist in many ways. I have a good understanding about how courts work, how SCOTUS works, and in a lesser way, I have an understanding about how politics work. Throughout President Trump's presidency, I have seen time and time again, this administration threaten all kinds of legal action where I knew there would be no actual result. I knew that Trump could not completely "defund" sanctuary cities due to 10th Amendment precedent, I knew that Trump could not single handedly end birthright citizenship, and I also watched as the promise of a Mexican funded border wall fell short of expectations. And every time POTUS would threaten legal action, or Tucker and Hannity would talk about how bombshells were coming that would enable Trump to do so, I knew that in the end those things would not pan out because they were not, from a legal perspective, doable.
Now, to be fair, Trump has done a considerable amount of good for this country with the powers that he does have. I voted for him because of his policies on jobs, and because of his focus on this country rather than being the "good guy" to the rest of the world. But when it comes to this election, I am once again at a point where I do not think that threats of legal action are going to do anything to stop Joe Biden from becoming the next president.
I don't want to jump into a huge legal analysis here, but just as some general background, SCOTUS does not have original jurisdiction over elections. Meaning, they are not going to listen to evidence of voter fraud and make their decision as to whether there should be recounts or audits. Rather, whatever dispute Trump has with the election process will need to work its way up through state courts, and if the issue is not resolved there, the SCOTUS can, but does not have to, decide on the dispute.
Now, I do not doubt that the SCOTUS would get involved in this case given how big it is, but there are also many scenarios that could happen in each individual state's Supreme Court. If that happens, that would mean that the Trump admin would have to come up with unique arguments for each state stating why there was voter fraud there and why the state should go back to, or stay with, Trump. This gets very tricky because you don't want to present an argument in one state that counters your argument in another. And to avoid such confusion, SCOTUS may very well leave each individual state's Supreme Court to decide what to do about their elections.
Having SCOTUS intervene in a way that would favor Trump because of personal grudges, political leanings, or because of being appointed by him goes against very deep seeded conservative principles of the SCOTUS majority. Keep that in mind as well and if you have a chance read through Bush v. Gore.
So with that being said, don't trust what you read online, and do some solid research for yourself. For that matter, don't trust me either, I'm just a random person online. But do keep fighting for what you believe in, keep true to your principles, keep God in your heart, and know that this is the greatest country on Earth, and whatever happens, we will never stop fighting.
First of all, this community is a lot of fun, it really is a 24/7 Trump rally, and I love that about it. Secondly, it is obvious now more than ever, that media companies, whether they be the MSM or smaller news sites and bloggers, all have one goal, and that is to make money, so please keep that in mind.
As an attorney, I have a certain view of the world and I have learned to be a realist in many ways. I have a good understanding about how courts work, how SCOTUS works, and in a lesser way, I have an understanding about how politics work. Throughout President Trump's presidency, I have seen time and time again, this administration threaten all kinds of legal action where I knew there would be no actual result. I knew that Trump could not completely "defund" sanctuary cities due to 10th Amendment precedent, I knew that Trump could not single handedly end birthright citizenship, and I also watched as the promise of a Mexican funded border wall fell short of expectations. And every time POTUS would threaten legal action, or Tucker and Hannity would talk about how bombshells were coming that would enable Trump to do so, I knew that in the end those things would not pan out because they were not, from a legal perspective, doable.
Now, to be fair, Trump has done a considerable amount of good for this country with the powers that he does have. I voted for him because of his policies on jobs, and because of his focus on this country rather than being the "good guy" to the rest of the world. But when it comes to this election, I am once again at a point where I do not think that threats of legal action are going to do anything to stop Joe Biden from becoming the next president.
I don't want to jump into a huge legal analysis here, but just as some general background, SCOTUS does not have original jurisdiction over elections. Meaning, they are not going to listen to evidence of voter fraud and make their decision as to whether there should be recounts or audits. Rather, whatever dispute Trump has with the election process will need to work its way up through state courts, and if the issue is not resolved there, the SCOTUS can, but does not have to, decide on the dispute.
Now, I do not doubt that the SCOTUS would get involved in this case given how big it is, but there are also many scenarios that could happen in each individual state's Supreme Court. If that happens, that would mean that the Trump admin would have to come up with unique arguments for each state stating why there was voter fraud there and why the state should go back to, or stay with, Trump. This gets very tricky because you don't want to present an argument in one state that counters your argument in another. And to avoid such confusion, SCOTUS may very well leave each individual state's Supreme Court to decide what to do about their elections.
Having SCOTUS intervene in a way that would favor Trump because of personal grudges, political leanings, or because of being appointed by him goes against very deep seeded conservative principles of the SCOTUS majority. Keep that in mind as well and if you have a chance read through Bush v. Gore.
So with that being said, don't trust what you read online, and do some solid research for yourself. For that matter, don't trust me either, I'm just a random person online. But do keep fighting for what you believe in, keep true to your principles, keep God in your heart, and know that this is the greatest country on Earth, and whatever happens, we will never stop fighting.
Blah blah we will win in the courts and there's nothing you can do to stop it
"For that matter, don't trust me either, I'm just a random person online."
ok
You forgot that we summoned the Egyptian God of chaos.
Kek walks among us.
I dont trust you. I do trust Trump.
As far as I know, the only petition to the SCOTUS is the one regarding the PA SC declaring that votes could arrive beyond the election date. This is a legal case since it violates the constitution and usurps the legal authority of the PA legislature. SCOTUS has only one valid ruling for this case.
The other issues should be resolved locally.
Correct, and they could theoretically all be solved in Trump's favor and never need to get to SCOTUS, but they could also all get resolved locally and not go in Trump's favor, or any other combination of those. My main point I guess that I'm getting at is that this is extremely complicated and not just as clear as "Trump will win at SCOTUS."
It's Trump or Blood for 70million+ americans.
You ARE going to have to pick a side.
God damn right. I don't trust anyone who doesn't know what time it is.
Do you think think there was intentional fraud in the software of the electronic voting system?
So, PA is calling for an audit. Orange County volunteers audit. AZ could go to Trump organically, auto-recount in GA and "glitches" may have just flipped WI - not to mention other states where dominion runs.
I am not seeing your pessimism, as state legislatures and automatic recounts could settle this without SCOTUS.
No ones reading your essay. Gtfo cuck
The PA case is SCOTUS all the way. PA Supreme Court rules against PA statute in conflict with Constitution.
Yes, but this was about a conflict related to when votes could be counted, not about the overlying issue of voter fraud. And so far as it stands, PA did right by SCOTUS by simply segregating ballots received after election night. (Please correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't read a huge amount on this case).
They did not segregate after either order. Mixing illegitimate ballots with legitimate ones on purpose and counting them together seems pretty fraudulent.
They ignored Alito twice.
I see what you're saying and I respect the fact that you took the time to write it. That said, I've sat in front of a screen for 6 days absorbing everything I can from many legal perspectives of which yours is another. You're right this has to be run through state courts but when presented with a hermetically sealed case, it's hard to just dismiss. I also agree that Trump doesn't have a 100% chance of success but after everything I've seen, it just doesn't SEEM possible that he loses. This is a team effort not just Trump and his legal boys. Even if he had the perfect case, by not having enough of the GOP behind him, it would go nowhere. I still think he comes out on top. There's just too much you can't ignore.
Again, I'm no legal expert or attorney. I'm just a mechanic with internet access. I'm trying to understand more of this kind of thing.
These cases are challenges to local law for access. However, this is tampering in the realm of a federal election. Different jurisdiction, different rules. But, as I understand it, they need to first come up with evidence that local districts violated their own laws.
Question: if the SCOTUS did make ruling in Trump’s favor, what would it likely be? I’ve seen all sorts of claims, but don’t know what the court can actually do to ‘remedy’ the issue? Would that be considered a “landmark” case where they are literally setting new precedent? Everyone quote Bush v. Gore ad Infinitum, but I don’t see the similarities other than it involving a federal election being disputed.
Given the dissimilarities between Bush v. Gore, and also the dissimilarities between the allegations in each sate, I have no idea what the remedy could be, and that's precisely why I feel that SCOTUS would be unable to make a blanket ruling that would "fix" each state's issue. But we'll see, this is an exciting time to get to see the legal system unfolding.
Do you think that if these obvious issues were brought before the court before the election that things may have played out differently? It seemed that the writing was on the wall and nothing was done.
I think the Trump admin did what it could. States use different systems to verify ballots so it's hard to know until the actual election if there is any fraud happening. It's also hard to take legal action when the only evidence of pre-election fraud are videos or witness accounts that are hard to verify if not impossible.
I'll use an example from person experience. My parents live in Missouri which allowed mail in voting and absentee voting, whereas before they only allowed absentee and you needed a sworn valid reason that you could not vote in person. For the mail in vote, you only needed to say that you wanted to mail in your vote. However, that ballot envelope needed to be signed AND notarized prior to mailing, meaning a notary needs to check to see if you have a valid ID and if you are indeed the person voting, so that was secure. However, I know of TONS of people who chose to vote absentee and simply lied about the reason they could not vote in person, most of which stated they were not going to be at their normal residence on voting day. Legally, that IS voted fraud, and that is not a legal vote. But, once that ballot is cast, it's now impossible to trace back to the person that cast it. And no prosecutor is going to go through the trouble of prosecuting someone for what most juries would view as a "technicality".
Yeah but, the one thing you're forgetting, the distinction between local and federal law. Sure states and districts are a complete cluster fuck to deal with legally. Especially when numbering in the hundreds within a month's time. However, this is tampering with an election and the feds have wide jurisdiction when it comes to federal crime. They'll come in and arrest an entire county election board, if it is warranted. Suddenly, the cost, time and resources needed to battle individual districts or states evaporates when the feds start emptying election offices.
"They'll come in and arrest an entire county election board, if it is warranted. Suddenly, the cost, time and resources needed to battle individual districts or states evaporates when the feds start emptying election offices."
I have yet to see in any administration in recent history anything close to this happening.
One other thing, "lawyer." I missed the subtlety of it a minute ago. IT IS NOT THE ADMINISTRATION THAT EXECUTES FEDERAL LAW.
I'm sorry, I don't quite follow what you mean by that statement.
With regard to elections, no I don't recall during my time either. However, it occurs to me it may have been the case when minorities and women were granted voting rights. However, I have seen the feds raid ranches, corporations and political offices. I live in Shitlinois, plenty of politicians have had their offices emptied for all kinds of reasons.
I agree with your analysis as far as it goes. I think lawsuits are weak sauce but also misdirection by the Trump admin. I think you need to widen your perspective and that you are underestimating Trump.
Here are two comments I made in other threads;
and today;
The ball is in the Dems court... but you can already feel the wind shifting. They are backing down but that does not mean we are done with China. They want Taiwan.
Thanks for your input. Though I disagree that the media is primarily profit motivated and you missed the part that Justice is coming, one way or another, because we know what time it is.
I appreciate it.