By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Wide spread election fraud 2020

Last edited:
tigermud said:
Robert Barns says the Texas Case has the best chance of success and that it has standing. it's the last chance. Electors clause of the 14th. SC remedy would be to turn it over to the house as originally predicted it would end up in the house.

https://www.scribd.com/document/487348469/TX-v-State-Motion-2020-12-07-FINAL#from_embed

Still a chance to save the republic. however great the odds
Click to expand...

Is their omission of Arizona and Nevada convenience or an acceptance that those states results were legitimate?
 
tigermud said:
Robert Barns says the Texas Case has the best chance of success and that it has standing. it's the last chance. Electors clause of the 14th. SC remedy would be to turn it over to the house as originally predicted it would end up in the house.

https://www.scribd.com/document/487348469/TX-v-State-Motion-2020-12-07-FINAL#from_embed

Still a chance to save the republic. however great the odds
Click to expand...

LOL, yes, this sleazy dipshit's absurd and unabashedly partisan lawsuit will save the Republic.

Ken's in hot water here, and even his good ol' boy Texan buddies are bailing on him, so he's clearly blowing state resources on this bullshit to make a hero of himself to Republitards.


EDIT (link):
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), who has been under indictment for years and was recently accused of bribery, whistleblower retaliation and an extramarital affair, is listed as the counsel of record in the case. Legal observers promptly noted that Texas Solicitor General Kyle Hawkins was conspicuously absent from the filing.
And as others have pointed out, it?s more than a little telling that Kyle Hawkins ? the Texas Solicitor General, who represents the State before #SCOTUS ? is not on the filings.

Good for him for refusing to associate himself with this utter and indefensible nonsense.
? Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) December 8, 2020
​
There's apparently a lot wrong with the suit:
Law&Crime asked election law experts for their reactions to this gambit, particularly: whether the would-be Texas lawsuit has merit and what the chances are that the justices will hear it.

  • ?No merit and no chance of success,? University of Kentucky Law Professor Joshua Douglas said.?There is zero chance this will work,? Douglas said.
...

...

  • Eugene Mazo, a Visiting Associate Professor at the Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, told Law&Crime that this is the ?craziest case of them all.? ?Texas here is asking the Supreme Court for permission to sue Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin over how those other states conducted their own elections,? he said. ?This is the dumbest case any lawyer has ever seen, and the Supreme Court won?t touch it. Really, this is the craziest case of them all. Unbelievable.?
We just discussed how state law controls elections in this thread! That's well-established. How could one state possibly sue over this, and how could anyone - other than Trump or someone Trump is paying money to bring these suits -think otherwise?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The SC has instructed the four defendant states to respond by 1500 tomorrow.
 
sggatecl said:
Is their omission of Arizona and Nevada convenience or an acceptance that those states results were legitimate?
Click to expand...


Not sure thought they should have included them also, not sure why they didn't
 
Last edited:
michchamp said:
LOL, yes, this sleazy dipshit's absurd and unabashedly partisan lawsuit will save the Republic.

Ken's in hot water here, and even his good ol' boy Texan buddies are bailing on him, so he's clearly blowing state resources on this bullshit to make a hero of himself to Republitards.


EDIT (link):
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), who has been under indictment for years and was recently accused of bribery, whistleblower retaliation and an extramarital affair, is listed as the counsel of record in the case. Legal observers promptly noted that Texas Solicitor General Kyle Hawkins was conspicuously absent from the filing.
And as others have pointed out, it?s more than a little telling that Kyle Hawkins ? the Texas Solicitor General, who represents the State before #SCOTUS ? is not on the filings.

Good for him for refusing to associate himself with this utter and indefensible nonsense.
? Steve Vladeck (@steve_vladeck) December 8, 2020
​
There's apparently a lot wrong with the suit:
Law&Crime asked election law experts for their reactions to this gambit, particularly: whether the would-be Texas lawsuit has merit and what the chances are that the justices will hear it.

  • ?No merit and no chance of success,? University of Kentucky Law Professor Joshua Douglas said.?There is zero chance this will work,? Douglas said.
...

...

  • Eugene Mazo, a Visiting Associate Professor at the Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, told Law&Crime that this is the ?craziest case of them all.? ?Texas here is asking the Supreme Court for permission to sue Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin over how those other states conducted their own elections,? he said. ?This is the dumbest case any lawyer has ever seen, and the Supreme Court won?t touch it. Really, this is the craziest case of them all. Unbelievable.?
We just discussed how state law controls elections in this thread! That's well-established. How could one state possibly sue over this, and how could anyone - other than Trump or someone Trump is paying money to bring these suits -think otherwise?
Click to expand...


Like I said the odds are great. But it in theory should be a valid reason for the SC to hear the case.
 
tigermud said:
Like I said the odds are great. But it in theory should be a valid reason for the SC to hear the case.
Click to expand...

Byco's right, they did agree to hear it, or at least ordered the 4 states to respond.

what theory though...? the law professors quoted in the article (and there were many) all agreed the suit is meritless.
 
michchamp said:
Byco's right, they did agree to hear it, or at least ordered the 4 states to respond.

what theory though...? the law professors quoted in the article (and there were many) all agreed the suit is meritless.
Click to expand...

Douglas advocates lowering the voting age to 16.
 
michchamp said:
Byco's right, they did agree to hear it, or at least ordered the 4 states to respond.

what theory though...? the law professors quoted in the article (and there were many) all agreed the suit is meritless.
Click to expand...

Really good point. I bet it was really hard to find a bunch of academics who thought a suit brought a Republican looking into issues that could hurt their team was without merit. Journalism is tough.
 
Last edited:
Spartanmack said:
Really good point. I bet it was really hard to find a bunch of academics who thought a suit brought a Republican looking into issues that could hurt their team was without merit. Journalism is tough.
Click to expand...


there was quite a bit of analysis from them as to why the issue was without merit in the article, including in the quote I posted above. I know reading is boring though. Sorry.
 
michchamp said:
Byco's right, they did agree to hear it, or at least ordered the 4 states to respond.

what theory though...? the law professors quoted in the article (and there were many) all agreed the suit is meritless.
Click to expand...

Not the same thing, Alito had lawyers in the PA respond also before he then decided to not do shit. I?m taking need to see them take up the case and hear oral arguments from Ted Cruz and others
 
michchamp said:
there was quite a bit of analysis from them as to why the issue was without merit in the article, including in the quote I posted above. I know reading is boring though. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Oh, they provided analysis - then there's no way it could be biased, my bad. It's not that reading is boring, it's just getting to be so tedious to read your stuff then read the links you're referring to and find out you're lying about what it says.
 
Well... that was quick. The Supreme Court just swatted Ken Paxton's WEAK ASS lawsuit into the stands:
?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.?
​
Just like all those law professors said...

Ouch. I guess the Supreme Court must be part of the conspiracy too.

And biased. They must be biased.

BIAS! BIAS! I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE BIASED!


Listen%2B3.jpg
 
Last sliver of hope gone, the fraud was massive and overwhelming but moot, blind eyes turned, fraud certified. Dem cheat machine will steal the senate in Jan, Harris will be the next president after Biden steps aside due to cognitive decline or health. The future is a dystopian equally assured misery for all nightmare

2-3 years tops. Only an act of GOD can save America now
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
34,928
Messages
1,130,355
Members
979
Latest member
MiGrampa

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top