2020 Presidential Race

#91,251
#91,251
NorthDallas40 said:
So I couldn’t sleep in the middle of the night and did some digging on this Texas suit. Everybody needs to take a pause and dig around some more as I’m not sure it’s real. What little info is available all sources back to the Breitbart article. Right now this looks like the “Joe Biden is indicted on a felony in Ukraine” story that I bit on too.

The only thing about TX and sueing seems to be Cruz wanting to argue the PA legislature’s case in front of SCOTUS that Alito moved the hearing up on today. Now I’m going to try and go back to sleep after my dipshit wife called and woke me 🤬
Click to expand...
Shut up you moron of course it’s real here’s a link to a local network with AG Paxton’s statement.

Batter up, Texas! 😂

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues Battleground States, Says Changes To 2020 Election Laws 'Unconstitutional'
 
  • Like
Reactions: rocytop2624, AM64 and marcusluvsvols
#91,257
#91,257
Stew Cook said:
Is there an no-excuse absentee, or regular absentee voting clause in there?

wow, just think of how many decades of elections will be overturned.
Click to expand...
Reaching a bit. The basis of the suit is the Constitution only vests the states legislatures with determining the means to assign the electors either via direct election or state election laws. State laws proscribe means for mail in ballots. In PA it’s an interesting case the GOP led legislature seeing the uniqueness of this year passed legislation enabling more mail in ballots and the state judges or state Supreme Court acted to further ease those rules on mail in ballots. That I believe is the basis of the SCOTUS hearing this morning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and loggervol
#91,259
#91,259
Terrells Bay88 said:
It's all about overturning this election and let the chips fall whereever.
Click to expand...

Well, Ted along with a few others have stated that mail-in ballots would spell the death of the GOP.

Many states already have the no-excuse absentee voting, but the few that have historically mailed ballots to registered voters automatically haven't been challenged, on this level, until Cheeto Mussolini lost and plotted his coup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga and tvolsfan
#91,260
#91,260
NorthDallas40 said:
Reaching a bit. The basis of the suit is the Constitution only vests the states legislatures with determining the means to assign the electors either via direct election or state election laws. State laws proscribe means for mail in ballots. In PA it’s an interesting case the GOP led legislature seeing the uniqueness of this year passed legislation enabling more mail in ballots and the state judges or state Supreme Court acted to further ease those rules on mail in ballots. That I believe is the basis of the SCOTUS hearing this morning.
Click to expand...

Sure, some the state's laws/constitutions are illegal/unconstitutional. therefore Trump's plotting to have key states reject the vote of the citizenry shouldn't be considered a crime.

I'm glad it's Ted, anyway
 
#91,261
#91,261
Questions for any and all that believe the election results (READ: Biden won) are somehow illegitimate:

(1) When else in the history of the United States was a Presidential election illegitimate?; and

(2) Given Trump similarly claimed in 2016 (prior to the vote) that the election results were "rigged", was the 2016 election similarly illegitimate?

# # #

October 17, 2016:

US election 2016: Trump says election 'rigged at polling places'

His comments appear to contradict his running mate Mike Pence, who told NBC Mr Trump would "absolutely" accept the election result, despite media "bias".

Mr Trump's adviser Rudy Giuliani has also accused Democrats of "cheating".

Polls suggest Mr Trump is losing ground in some key battleground states against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

Mr Trump has questioned the legitimacy of the election process in a series of tweets, the latest of which said on Monday: "Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day.

"Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on? So naive!"

An earlier tweet said: "The election is absolutely being rigged by the dishonest and distorted media pushing Crooked Hillary - but also at many polling places - SAD."

The White House candidate also tweeted: "Election is being rigged by the media, in a coordinated effort with the Clinton campaign, by putting stories that never happened into news!"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: K-town Vol Fan
#91,262
#91,262
Stew Cook said:
Sure, some the state's laws/constitutions are illegal/unconstitutional. therefore Trump's plotting to have key states reject the vote of the citizenry shouldn't be considered a crime.

I'm glad it's Ted, anyway
Click to expand...
I’d encourage you to have a snickers and relax. Give one to zep too for that matter. If the states overstepped their bounds and broke the rules that’s on them and they only own that fallout. This is part of that “Trump can have his day in court” thing we talked about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#91,263
#91,263
NorthDallas40 said:
I’d encourage you to have a snickers and relax. Give one to zep too for that matter. If the states overstepped their bounds and broke the rules that’s on them and they only own that fallout. This is part of that “Trump can have his day in court” thing we talked about.
Click to expand...

I'm glad it's Ted
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenGrimm
#91,264
#91,264
Stew Cook said:
More and more, I find myself double-checking to make sure I haven't mistakenly clicked on the QAnon thread.

This is like no strike-out t-ball. If some of you eventually posts something credible, maybe it won't matter that the other 99% was complete BS.

Keep swingin' kids!
Click to expand...
"I don't like it, therefore, I declare conspiracy theory!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and OldVolMan
#91,265
#91,265
Stew Cook said:
I'm glad it's Ted
Click to expand...
Lol he said he would like to argue it if SCOTUS decides to hear it. They have to hear it first. And I believe Cruz was a fairly accomplished attorney having a Dep AG position for W and he was Solicitor General for the state of Texas. And it wasn’t that long ago
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#91,267
#91,267
BowlBrother85 said:
That guy is putting the cart before the horse. It is very unlikely that 4 of the justices will agree to review the case, which is needed to grant certiorari. None of this post-election litigation has had any merit.
Click to expand...
You’ve been reading the internet this morning. I believe it’s called a writ of certiorari also.
 
#91,269
#91,269
Stew Cook said:
Is there an no-excuse absentee, or regular absentee voting clause in there?

wow, just think of how many decades of elections will be overturned.
Click to expand...
They don’t have standing to sue PA, MI, or WI for creating laws that they are entitled to create. It’s a publicity stunt. Texas AG needs to be doing his prison prep course, instead.
 
#91,270
#91,270
BowlBrother85 said:
No, I've just had a political science class... and it's most commonly referred to as "granting cert".
Click to expand...
Oh I’d say it’s most commonly referred to as saying they agreed to hear the case instead of dropping lawyer speak and trying to sound smart. And I’ll bet you remember that from a poly sci class 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top