You can sue anyone for anything, and establishing standing in a defamation suit is pretty straightforward. I'm sure the individuals involved can call upon multiple legal arguments to defend themselves, but standing isn't one of them.
To win a defamation case, Dominion will need to prove actual malice. Good faith accusations and arguments are not going to prove that, so if that's all they have, the people getting sued have nothing to worry about.
Elias' job is to get democrats elected.
The voting machines aren't filing lawsuits lol
Standing isn't really an issue in a defamation case.
That was neither legitimate, competent, or official.
This audit should be way better.
I wouldn't say it's "not true" as making that determination would require a level of transparency we did not get.
But I would agree that based on the evidence we have seen, we can not determine that the Dominion stuff *is *true either. Powell's suit was a complete joke full of flimsy evidence, which is evidenced by the fact that Trump's legal team never filed anything Dominion-related themselves.
illegal rule changes are only a criminal matter if you can prove corrupt intent. So no one, for now.
Congress can regulate elections too, per the Elections Clause, at least for Senators and Representatives. Historically, the states have implemented these regulations for local & presidential elections too, to avoid a two-track election system with twice the bureaucracy. There's not much case law, but it seems very probable that it would be legal to deviate from these regulations for the presidential election, and it's definitely legal for local elections.
Not at all, first of all the article only mentions late arriving mail-in ballots without a postmark, not all mail-in ballots. Second, the judge ruled it violated state statutes, meaning that the legality of this is contingent upon state-specific law, not US Constitution violations that could be generalized to other states.
Yeah Rudy needs to stop talking to the media and talk to a real defamation lawyer, this can easily go very badly for him.
Naive reasoning or not, it's how our legal system works. Election regulations not being followed can't cancel the Biden presidency at this point. Only proving the actual fraud that followed from those regulations not being followed might give you a shot (but unprecedented, so who knows), and the bar to prove fraud is very high.
LARPing faggot saying we're not clear-eyed, hilarious. As if we didn't notice you fucks claiming Jan 20th was going to be the day you were going to rub how right you were in our faces. How'd that work out Qtard? Piss off to GA.win.
Not a big fan of most of his source page being links to secondary sources.
Trump is not a lawyer, and sadly he surrounded himself with the worst fucking lawyers, at least as far as election law goes.
Silver lining is that all the stuff that was dismissed on laches can now easily be filed in time for the next election.
So are you an internet tough guy faggot, or a glowie?
I'm no expert on fracking but I'm pretty sure guerrilla fracking isn't viable.
"Sanctuary" BS just means local law enforcement won't cooperate with the feds. It works for illegals because tracking them down is hard for the feds, but they can still do so. A corporation doing fracking though? Easiest thing in the world for the feds to destroy.
You joke, but that's actually kind of true, since SCOTUS is part of the federal government and they ultimately decide what is or isn't constitutional.
The courts determine standing, not states. They could put "no standing" in a lawsuit, but they'd lose since the federal government has a cognizable legal interest on how federal land is utilized thanks to the Property Clause of the Constitution, so when her edicts are ignored injury-in-fact is easily established.
Texas has almost no federal land so these regulations don't really affect them to begin with.
Sure, as long as you're prepared to start an act of war against the federal government by ignoring the Constitution.
Because "sanctuary" just means local and state law enforcement won't do anything. The feds can still get the illegals, but it makes it harder on them because it's not easy to identify illegals and there's tons of them.
Cracking down on easily identifiable corporations doing the fracking on the other hand is a walk-in-the-park for the feds.
If you had no voting machines, every single ballot would be "adjudicated" by poll workers when it's counted. That's what adjudication is, a human being determining how to count a ballot.
If adjudication can be used to commit fraud, it means election officials and regulations are garbage, and they'd be garbage with or without Dominion. Which is kind of the point of this thread, voting machine shenanigans are a distraction from the fact that election integrity is all about laws and regulations. You can have banana republic elections with paper ballots, and secure elections with voting machines (as long as there's paper ballot backups + risk-limiting audits).
Statements not on video that are attested to by just one biased dude.
These "censored" networks are big boy companies, if they felt Dominion had no case, they could've and should've fought it. Their cowardice is their own failing.