| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wsurfer
Joined: 17 Aug 2000
Posts: 1635
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:24 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | | And just like a broken clock, the Anti Americans in Texas are calling for secession ..We lost 600,000 lives in the civil war but it doesn’t stop the seditious behavior of these cretins ... |
Like they say "everything is bigger in Texas", that includes a-holes!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14879
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2020 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/wisconsin-supreme-court-shows-divisions-as-it-hears-trump-lawsuit-seeking-to-overturn-state-s-election/ar-BB1bSsgr?ocid=msedgntp
Wisconsin Supreme Court shows divisions as it hears Trump lawsuit seeking to overturn state's election
| Quote: | Memo to Trump: 'Drop your hopeless lawsuits that are tearing at the heart of…
Dr. Fauci's "Biggest Fear" About the COVID Vaccine
USA TODAY logoWisconsin Supreme Court shows divisions as it hears Trump lawsuit seeking to overturn state's election
MADISON, Wis. – The state Supreme Court showed deep divisions Saturday as it contemplated a final push by President Donald Trump to throw out President-elect Joe Biden's narrow win in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin Chief Justice Patience Roggensack convenes a Supreme Court hearing on President Donald. Trump's lawsuit seeking to overturn the Wisconsin election.© Screen grab Wisconsin Chief Justice Patience Roggensack convenes a Supreme Court hearing on President Donald. Trump's lawsuit seeking to overturn the Wisconsin election.
The arguments – a rarity on a weekend – came amid a string of legal setbacks for the president. During the arguments, a federal judge in Milwaukee ruled against Trump, dealing the seventh defeat to Trump and his allies in 10 days over Wisconsin's results.
The three liberals on the state's high court showed extreme skepticism toward Trump's arguments. Three conservatives showed some support for at least parts of his claims.
Get daily updates on the Packers during the season.
Unclear were the views of Justice Brian Hagedorn, who was elected last year with the support of Republicans but has sided at times with the liberals. He joined the liberals last week in turning down three other challenges to Wisconsin's election results.
In the latest case, the justices are expected to rule before the Electoral College meets at noon Monday.
Biden won Wisconsin by about 21,000 votes out of 3.3 million cast, giving him a margin of victory of 0.6 percentage points. Trump paid $3 million for a recount in Dane and Milwaukee counties, but the recount slightly widened Biden's win.
Trump brought a lawsuit directly to the state Supreme Court, but the justices rejected it on a 4-3 vote last week, saying he should start in lower court.
Trump then filed a new challenge and Reserve Judge Stephen Simanek on Friday ruled against Trump, saying officials had run a fair election that was free of widespread fraud and misconduct.
Hours later, Trump appealed and asked the Supreme Court to take up the case rather than have it go to the Court of Appeals. The justices agreed to take the case and scheduled Saturday's arguments.
A quest to toss 220,000 ballots
Trump attorney Jim Troupis argued several election practices in Wisconsin – some of them long-standing – were illegal. He said voting was tainted by fraud, but the fraud was perpetrated by clerks and poll workers rather than voters.
"This whole case is about fraud," Troupis says. "The statutes are in place because they presume if you do not follow them there is fraud."
He faced tough questioning from the court's liberals, who said it was unfair for him to try to eliminate more than 220,000 ballots in the state's most populous counties while letting stand ballots that were cast in the same ways in other counties.
"This lawsuit, Mr. Troupis, smacks of racism," Justice Jill Karofsky said.
Troupis said Trump limited his recount to Dane and Milwaukee counties because a statewide recount would cost nearly $8 million. Karofsky scoffed at that notion, alluding to the more than $170 million the president has raised since Election Day.
"This isn’t about the amount of money that this recount cost," she said. "This is about disenfranchising voters in two counties, and only two counties, in the state of Wisconsin."
Karofsky won a seat on the court this year. She said before the election she would never vote for Trump, saying there were so many reasons she opposed him she didn't know where to start.
Troupis argued clerks were wrong to fill in the addresses of witnesses on absentee ballot envelopes, and Justices Rebecca Bradley and Annette Ziegler showed sympathy for those concerns.
The policy that allows clerks to fill in witness addresses was put forward four years ago at the behest of Republicans on the state Elections Commission. In some cases, clerks fill in full addresses, but in others they simply add the city or state when the witness hasn't provided it. Bradley emphasized that state law — not guidance from the commission — is what must be followed.
Related: Here are the 4 voting issues at the heart of Trump's Wisconsin election lawsuit
Troupis also challenged "Democracy in the Park" events held before the election in Madison, where poll workers stationed themselves in more than 200 locations to collect absentee ballots. Election officials have likened the events to the absentee ballot drop boxes that cities around the state set up.
But Chief Justice Patience Roggensack and Ziegler expressed skepticism of that theory, with Roggensack saying she feared the events amounted to allowing in-person early voting before the state's two-week early voting period began.
"My concern is that this is early voting, OK? It happened way before Oct. 20, when early voting could start," she said. "It's very much the same thing if you do in-person voting."
Defending election officials, Assistant Attorney General Colin Roth disagreed. He said it wasn't a form of early in-person voting because voters had to get absentee ballots sent to them in advance.
State law allows voters to hand-deliver absentee ballots to clerks, but Roggensack said that was supposed to happen in clerks' offices, not "here, there and everywhere."
In his most sweeping argument, Troupis claimed in-person early voting had been conducted illegally. He contended state law requires voters to fill out two forms instead of one and maintained that his own ballot should be thrown out because he had only. filled out one form.
Clerks have been using one form for more than a decade. Justice Rebecca Dallet noted the single form was used when Trump won Wisconsin four years ago.
"What I’m hearing you say then is really the form was fine in 2016 when it helped the president to win but now in 2020 when he has not won the state of Wisconsin there is something illegal or improper about the form," Dallet said.
Troupis contended clerks gave voters too much latitude to decide if they were confined to their homes. Voters who identify themselves as indefinitely confined do not have to provide a photo ID to vote absentee, as others must.
About 215,000 voters have claimed that status and Republicans contend some of them don't meet the criteria. Democrats have said the increase in people who consider themselves indefinitely confined is not surprising because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Bradley raised a number of questions about the practice, while the liberal justices said there was little evidence voters had improperly claimed to be indefinitely confined.
The justices are already considering the issue in a lawsuit brought this spring by the state Republican Party.
In his ruling Friday, Simanek noted that guidance from the state Elections Commission on how to administer the indefinite confinement law "was essentially approved by the Wisconsin Supreme Court" in an initial ruling in that case.
Legal setbacks for Trump
The case comes after a series of defeats for Trump in Wisconsin and around the country.
Last week, the state Supreme Court declined to take three lawsuits seeking to overturn the state's results. This week, in addition to Simanek's ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court turned away an attempt by Texas to rescind the results in Wisconsin and three other states and two federal judges in Milwaukee tossed out a pair of cases seeking to eliminate the state's results. The latest of those was issued Saturday by U.S. District Judge Brett Ludwig, a Trump nominee.
The earlier rulings by the high court show the challenges for Trump before the justices.
A majority refused to take up his initial suit and two of the three dissenters, Roggensack and Ziegler, showed reluctance to throw out large numbers of votes, as Trump requested.
In another 4-3 ruling in a different challenge to the election results last week, Hagedorn wrote a concurring opinion expressing alarm at the prospect of tossing aside the will of the voters.
"This is a dangerous path we are being asked to tread," he wrote. "The loss of public trust in our constitutional order resulting from the exercise of this kind of judicial power would be incalculable."
On Saturday, Hagedorn mostly listened and occasionally asked technical questions.
Federal court goes against Trump
As the state justices debated their case, Ludwig issued his decision from the federal bench. He ruled against Trump, concluding state officials had followed Wisconsin's laws when they conducted the Nov. 3 election.
Ludwig described the case as "extraordinary."
"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," he wrote.
"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."
In his federal lawsuit, Trump challenged many of the election policies he is arguing against in state court.
Ludwig found that the state Legislature had given the Wisconsin Elections Commission the ability to advise clerks on how to set up their election procedures. Siding with Trump would allow every losing candidate to run to court after each election, he wrote. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14879
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2020 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vientomas wrote: | Hey Malibu Barbie! Remember that word...what was it? Standing?
Texas denied for lack of standing
The court's order Friday night was unsigned, and court did not provide a vote count, but there were no dissents to the order made public.
In its short order, the court said that Texas had not demonstrated that it had the legal right to bring the suit because it had not demonstrated a "judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections."
The order states: "The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot."
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12
/11/politics/supreme-court-texas-trump-biden/index.html |
you got it wrong , it is malibu barfie, when it talks the stench is that of barf.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14879
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 13, 2020 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
right wingers are such liars, she the right wing hero claims her source is a military intelligence officer... hahahaha right wingers are so stupid. He spent his career in the army as a mechanic.... you can not make this shiiite up. No wonder why she and he did not want his name released.
wow you got this one right wingers... i am sure the truck mechanic has the proof....
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sidney-powell-s-code-named-election-fraud-witness-never-worked-in-military-intelligence-like-filings-claim-report/ar-BB1bSiwJ?ocid=msedgntp
Sidney Powell's code-named election fraud witness never worked in military intelligence like filings claim: Report
| Quote: | Opinion: The 126 Republicans who signed on for 'an act of cynical…
Chris Christie dismisses Trump approach to overturn election as ‘absurdity’
Washington Examiner logoSidney Powell's code-named election fraud witness never worked in military intelligence like filings claim: Report
Sidney Powell said her secret witness who can prove the election was stolen from President Trump was a former military intelligence official in court filings, but that's apparently inaccurate.
a man looking at the camera© Provided by Washington Examiner
Powell, a former federal prosecutor, has told the courts she wants to seal "Spider's" identity (sometimes referred to as "Spyder"), whom she said was an electronic intelligence analyst for the Arizona-based 305th Military Intelligence Battalion. "Spider," however, never completed the entry-level training course, said Meredith Mingledorff, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Army Intelligence Center of Excellence, the Washington Post reported.
Even with her request to hide her witness's name, one of her filings showed “Spyder’s” legal name to be Joshua Merritt, and he’s a 43-year-old information technology consultant in Texas.
Merritt confirmed his work with Powell and maintained that he did graduate from the intelligence training program, even though Mingledorff said, “He kept washing out of courses” and that “he’s not an intelligence analyst.”
By his own account, he was a trainee in the program for less than a year over 15 years ago. He also said that Powell’s characterization of him as a military intelligence officer is misleading because he was a student at the time. |
| Quote: | | Merritt enlisted in the Army in 2003, and he was honorably discharged 10 years later following deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. He spent most of that time as a wheeled vehicle mechanic. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2020 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So far, no "faithless" electors...I wonder if Trump will make good on his " I will vacate the White House if the EC votes Biden in on Dec. 14th" comment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wynsurfer
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 940
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2020 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | | So far, no "faithless" electors...I wonder if Trump will make good on his " I will vacate the White House if the EC votes Biden in on Dec. 14th" comment. |
As of 3:00 pm. est. Biden has captured the elector college votes in all states that Trump has contested.................... He's toast!!!!!!!!
It certainly will be entertaining to watch the worm squirm!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2020 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If they weren't going to honor the frontline medical staff or the people behind the covid vaccines, at least they could have been honest with the person they chose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Who should they have chosen ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 4303
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person of the year 2016 was Trump. Putin was it in 2007. Even Giuliani made it in 2001. The President elect is always the Time Person of the Year. Bush was it twice, as was Obama. Trump, sadly, for some here, is not on the cover this year. Hurts, doesn't it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
