The State of Texas filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court

a reply to: Gryphon66

I did read Time article and see its typical in presenting over hyped half of story. The other missing half being an explanation of civil court procedure.

Making case on an executive or unilateral change in voting procedure which disenfrachises certain class of voters does not in narrow sense of law constitute fraud which indeed makes a lawyer say "this case not about fraud" in court.

Time forgot to explain that.

My comment - aren't folks on left tired of MSM treating audience as uneducated rubes.


The Texas case would fit my example in no claim fraud nor need to prove fraud to SCOTUS.

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Gryphon66

I did read Time article and see its typical in presenting over hyped half of story. The other missing half being an explanation of civil court procedure.

Making case on an executive or unilateral change in voting procedure which disenfrachises certain class of voters does not in narrow sense of law constitute fraud which indeed makes a lawyer say "this case not about fraud" in court.

Time forgot to explain that.

My comment - aren't folks on left tired of MSM treating audience as uneducated rubes.

So, you have the backup for my claim that concerned you regarding Trump's attorneys alledging fraud?

Awesome. Please let me know if I can be helpful in any further way.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Gryphon66

The fact they are only going after states where Biden won says it all.

One can easily find states where Trump won that had similar changes via executive action, yet the lawsuit did no name those states.

We both know this will go no where, but it might be the kind of news that will help Trump get more donations.

What a stupid take.... The right is going after states they are worried about and seem suspicious... If the left is worried about states Trump won and that used Dominion, then call your state reps and tell them to make a push for a forensic audit like we are doing.... You are capable of doing the same things we are doing... you just enjoyed the results from election night, so you dont care to double/triple check to make sure everything is kosher.. You know once these forensic audits begin, your side is done... its clear as day, which is why you dont want any of this to happen... But why not put all sides at ease, and audit all states that used Dominion... Cool with that? Yea, didnt think so...

also, why are people like you so fascinated by donations that are being made? If anything, stupid trump supporters are just being suckered out of their money, so why do you care?

Massive buthurt en route.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
Normally I'd say republicans would side with their party in a toss-up, but I don't know that's the case right now. If they appoint Trump electors and it sways the outcome of the election I think there will literally be assassination attempts.

I don't see anything drastic occurring. The Supreme Court is not going to vacate elections or compel States to certify for someone the citizens didn't vote for. This is such an overreach of a lawsuit I think it's laughable.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes the one that misconstrued procedural cases as fraud case.

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes the one that misconstrued procedural cases as fraud case.

My claim: Trump's attorneys have admited in court that there is no evidence of fraud.

Question asked and answered.

Best.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
Normally I'd say republicans would side with their party in a toss-up, but I don't know that's the case right now. If they appoint Trump electors and it sways the outcome of the election I think there will literally be assassination attempts.

I don't see anything drastic occurring. The Supreme Court is not going to vacate elections or compel States to certify for someone the citizens didn't vote for. This is such an overreach of a lawsuit I think it's laughable.

What's likely the next step in the process, will all the justices look over the request, or does one justice take the lead and make the decision to whether its heard or not?

a reply to: Gryphon66

It means that laws mean absolutely nothing to anyone but “we the people”and that the only thing we have to use against the monsters we created is our voice (vote).... IF that is lost, what else do we have?

As we sit currently all we have is the proverbial “take our word for it” from the media, same for the (legislatures, SOS, Governors, AGs, etc) they all have said “no fraud” or “not enough evidence”.

However, as you or even a 11 year old could see the vast amounts of proof by way of factual, mathematical, statistical and yes even anecdotal (through *thousands* of signed affidavits). What saddens me the most; the absolute disregard for honesty. It’s all you have in life to create *actual* equality; of any and all things to be “equal” it must come down to everyone’s *honesty/integrity*.

In closing: Texas is at least pursuing honesty, whether it will be hit with silence and slander, or integrity and due diligence remains to be seen.

Have a great day, I have faith in you and everyone else in this world to make it how it should be. A free one.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
Normally I'd say republicans would side with their party in a toss-up, but I don't know that's the case right now. If they appoint Trump electors and it sways the outcome of the election I think there will literally be assassination attempts.

The Supreme Court is not going to ... compel States to certify for someone the citizens didn't vote for.

Which is why the states have to show that their elections followed the law as enacted by the Legislatures, which were put in place to insure voter, ballot and tally integrity.

Elections laws are put in place to make sure the process properly tallies the actual vote of eligible voters.

If that process is not followed (and I would add, to an extent to where it makes a real question of the accuracy of the results) and the losing candidate can show just that - that the process was not followed - then they've shown a prima facie case that the results are invalid.

The burden would then shift to the states to show that they did, in fact, follow legislatively adopted procedures, and that any deviations were insufficient to effect the outcome.

If they can't do that, then your premise that "the citizens voted for Biden" is false; and in fact we may never know who received the majority of properly cast votes from eligible voters, based on the reports of widespread shenanigans we've heard thus far.

Whether the remedy is to tell the states to certify a certain candidate, I too would doubt that happens. More likely it will be remanded to the legislatures to deliberate and come up with electors on their own - per the Constitution.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Perhaps Paxton thinks he has nothing else to lose?

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) is under investigation by the FBI over allegations of bribery and abuse of office in an effort to help a real estate developer and wealthy donor, two unidentified sources told The Associated Press.

The Hill 11/20/20

Texas is the Plantiff.

It's Texas' claim to prove.

We will see.

originally posted by: jhn7537
What's likely the next step in the process, will all the justices look over the request, or does one justice take the lead and make the decision to whether its heard or not?

Four have to agree to take this from what I understand.

a reply to: SeektoUnderstand

Yes, it has been my suspicion that all efforts to overturn the legal US Election are merely intended to erode confidence in our Electoral processes.

As if any of us had any confidence, LOL.

Just as a note, it's a really poor argument to claim "I'm right because everyone agrees with me."

Logical fallacy.

originally posted by: LanceCorvette
Which is why the states have to show that their elections followed the law as enacted by the Legislatures...

They don't have to show anything, this is Texas' case to prove.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) is under investigation by the FBI over allegations of bribery and abuse of office in an effort to help a real estate developer and wealthy donor, two unidentified sources told The Associated Press.

Another scumbag politician.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
this is Texas' case to prove.

Though it would seem to be a foregone conclusion ... they are gonna have to prove it ... if the case is accepted (in time).

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LanceCorvette
Which is why the states have to show that their elections followed the law as enacted by the Legislatures...

They don't have to show anything, this is Texas' case to prove.

That's a very basic legal principle isn't it?

Interesting that anyone would miss that fact.

Our leaders have sold us out.

Dirty rotten ......................let me at um.

They should be exiled. This is huge. China is laughing at us.

Explain to me how there can be so many traitors in the country?

I don't want that SOB as my president.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Paxton is a real dirtbag...in addition to those allegations, he has been under indictment for 5 years for federal securities fraud charges. He has a lot to lose in a world without a Trump Justice Department.

www.texastribune.org...