DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus SCOTUS Puts Nail In Coffin of Fascist Coup Attempt

j/c...

Let’s hope Trump supporters show their disgust to the deep state RINOs in the Supreme Court by not showing up for the senate elections.

j/c

Two questions:
1) What lawsuit is the next one that will be filed?
2) How long before Trump tweets about either
(a) the liberal SCOTUS or
(b) threats to fire the justices that don't agree with him?

I can't even guess on the first one, but I'm sure something is coming. The second has probably happened already but I don't have a twitter account and certainly wouldn't follow him

right? somebody needs to get rid of these deep state activist judges in the SC!!!

Zero shame or respect for democracy.

good lord, its getting to the point where they have better odds of winning the powerball than winning any of these cases.

Is it January 20th yet?

It’s a beautiful morning!

January 21st will be a beautiful sunrise

Can't believe what a total loser this guy is.
Under his "Leadership" we have gone backwards as a nation.
Notice how there is still no evidence to support anything he says.
Too bad we have morons who believe him without any evidence.

And we have such a beautiful loser with trump. The best loser of all time. He’ll be known as the GOAT of all losers. “Loser the great”.

Lawmakers Who Backed Texas Lawsuit Should Be Barred From House: NJ Congressman


https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/bill-pascrell-house-lawmaker-traitors-texas-lawsuit-023004107.html

Everyone who enabled him should be committed to a mental institution and declared incompetent to the man/woman. EVERYONE.

Another example of an issue I stand with Republicans on. The need to end frivolous lawsuits. Wait, no, that's yet another issue they used to stand for they have now abandoned for Trump.

Nah. This is sooo fun to watch. Another day another loss. Just gets better and better.

If states charged the trump team a few million to file a lawsuit, they’d be helping out their state funds for schools and police.

If GOPers want to deny blue states and cities funds, they should tax the crap out of republicans and corporations in return. Call it the MAGA tax. And they should also tell red states they are on their own, and stop paying into the government welfare fund that bails them out every damn year. If kentucky gives you Mitch, screw them. If you want to operate your corp in New York or Cali, pay the tax. If you tried to usher in fascism, pay the tax. If you don't like the tax, get out.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-wisconsin-court-losses/

One more nail. One more Huuuuge loss to add to Trump's collection.

"I do not know how you can come before this court and possibly ask for a remedy that is unheard of in U.S. history. ... It is not normal."

Wonder what is next on the wanna-be King's agenda.

If Trump or his team had any proof at all, these cases wouldn't keep getting tossed out.

I mean if a decidedly conservative SCOTUS with three justices appointed by Trump see no value in his cases, you'd think he'd get the message. Now he turns on SCOTUS

I wonder how long it will be before they begin receiving death threats from the Trump loyalists, Proud Boys, American Nazi Party, White Supremists and other nuts.

Does this count as a win or a loss for Trump?

Judge appointed by Trump heard his case to overturn Biden's win, wholly rejected it on the merits

Peter Weber
Mon, December 14, 2020, 1:47 AM EST


President Trump told Fox News' Brian Kilmeade on Saturday, in a clip broadcast Sunday, that no judges have had "the courage" to allow his lawyers and allies to argue his baseless claims that the election was "stolen," specifically criticizing the U.S. Supreme Court for declining to "go into the evidence" on his cases because of "little technicalities, like a thing called standing."

In fact, several courts have offered to hear pro-Trump lawyers argue their case, and U.S. District Judge Brett Ludwig in Wisconsin shot down the latest of those cases on Saturday. "A sitting president who did not prevail in his bid for reelection has asked for federal court help in setting aside the popular vote based on disputed issues of election administration, issues he plainly could have raised before the vote occurred," wrote Ludwig, a Trump appointee. "This court allowed the plaintiff the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits. In his reply brief, plaintiff 'asks that the Rule of Law be followed.' It has been."

The "most telling aspect" of Ludwig's ruling isn't that "the rejecting was done by a Trump-appointed judge" or "that it was done on the merits," Andrew McCarthy argues at National Review. It's when Ludwig notes that "on the morning of the hearing, the parties reached agreement on a stipulated set of facts," meaning "there was no actual disagreement between the Trump team and Wisconsin officials about the pertinent facts of the case."

In other words, "there was no there there," McCarthy writes. "Despite telling the country for weeks that this was the most rigged election in history, the campaign didn't think it was worth calling a single witness. Despite having the opportunity of a hearing before a Trump appointee who was willing to give the campaign ample opportunity to prove its case, the campaign said, 'Never mind.'" And "this is not the first time the campaign ducked an opportunity to prove its claims of a stolen election in court," he adds. In Wisconsin, as in Pennsylvania and Michigan, "every time a court offers him an opportunity to establish by proof what he is promoting by Twitter, Team Trump folds."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-appointed-trump-heard-case-064713769.html

He is still at it.......

Trump tries again at Supreme Court to overturn Pennsylvania election results

WASHINGTON — Undeterred by dismissals and admonitions from judges, President Donald Trump’s campaign continued with its unprecedented efforts to overturn the results of the Nov 3. election Sunday, saying it had filed a new petition with the Supreme Court.

The petition seeks to reverse a trio of Pennsylvania Supreme Court cases having to do with mail-in ballots and asks the court to reject voters’ will and allow the Pennsylvania General Assembly to pick its own slate of electors.

While the prospect of the highest court in the land throwing out the results of a democratic election based on unfounded charges of voter fraud is extraordinary unlikely, it wouldn’t change the outcome. President-elect Joe Biden would still be the winner even without Pennsylvania because of his wide margin of victory in the Electoral College.

“The petition seeks all appropriate remedies, including vacating the appointment of electors committed to Joseph Biden and allowing the Pennsylvania General Assembly to select their replacements,” Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani said in a statement.

He is asking the court to move swiftly so it can rule before Congress meets on Jan. 6 to tally the vote of the Electoral College, which decisively confirmed Biden’s win with 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232. But the justices are not scheduled to meet again, even privately, until Jan 8, two days after Congress counts votes.

Pennsylvania last month certified Biden as the winner of the state’s 20 Electoral College votes after three weeks of vote counting and a string of failed legal challenges.

Trump’s campaign and his allies have now filed roughly 50 lawsuits alleging widespread voting fraud. Almost all have been dismissed or dropped because there is no evidence to support their allegations.

Trump has lost before judges of both political parties, including some he appointed. And some of his strongest rebukes have come from conservative Republicans. The Supreme Court has also refused to take up two cases — decisions that Trump has scorned.

The new case is at least the fourth involving Pennsylvania that Trump’s campaign or Republican allies have taken to the Supreme Court in a bid to overturn Biden’s victory in the state or at least reverse court decisions involving mail-in balloting.

The Trump campaign’s filing Sunday appears to target three decisions of Pennsylvania’s Democratic-majority state Supreme Court.

In November, the state’s highest court upheld a Philadelphia judge’s ruling that state law only required election officials to allow partisan observers to be able to see mail-in ballots being processed, not stand close enough to election workers to see the writing on individual envelopes.

It also ruled that more than 8,300 mail-in ballots in Philadelphia that had been challenged by the Trump campaign because of minor technical errors — such as a voter’s failure to write their name, address or date on the outer ballot envelope — should be counted. In October, the court ruled unanimously that counties are prohibited from rejecting mail-in ballots simply because a voter’s signature does not resemble the signature on the person’s voter registration form.

https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/12/21/...ection-results/