The election litigation thread

[Dutch Oven]

Of course you think you're the resident expert on Peanuts as well as the law.
Just like Charlie Brown thinks this time he'll kick the ball.

I can see why you don't understand it. You are a lot like Snoopy.

 

[Perry Mason]

I just remembered this... which I offer to you for the benefit of your entertainment, Dutchie... because it says volumes about the substance of your arguments...

"The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience."
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Perhaps you will entertain me by clarifying why thinking romantically about the law is, somehow, undesirable?

Perry

 

[Frankfooter]

I can see why you don't understand it. You are a lot like Snoopy.

I see why you identify with Charlie Brown.
Don't worry, that next football will be the one you kick.

 

[shack]

another thing that is funny to me is that trump positively claims that he won and Biden lost.

Even funnier, yesterday trump claimed that for him to leave the WH, Biden has to PROVE that he got 80 million votes. Lunacy. When has a candidate ever had to prove that they got the number of votes counted. In this case, the biden of proof is on trump to prove that Joe did NOT get those votes. 36 tries and not yet.

 

[toguy5252]

Even funnier, yesterday trump claimed that for him to leave the WH, Biden has to PROVE that he got 80 million votes. Lunacy. When has a candidate ever had to prove that they got the number of votes counted. In this case, the biden of proof is on trump to prove that Joe did NOT get those votes. 36 tries and not yet.

You are confusing Trumpworld and reality.

 

[Valcazar]

You can't even interpret Peanuts correctly, why do you think you know the law better than anyone else?

He's more right than you.
Lucy is the villain for pulling away the football and Charlie is a sucker because he keeps thinking she won't do it.

 

[Valcazar]

Even funnier, yesterday trump claimed that for him to leave the WH, Biden has to PROVE that he got 80 million votes. Lunacy. When has a candidate ever had to prove that they got the number of votes counted. In this case, the biden of proof is on trump to prove that Joe did NOT get those votes. 36 tries and not yet.

The state certification is the proof he got the votes. As usual, Trump is making shit up to have a story for his fans to cling to.

 

[kherg007]

Remember when trump lost Iowa caucus to Ted Cruz in 2016 he claimed fraud. Every republican primary he did not win he claimed fraud. Even when he lost popular vote to Hilary he claimed fraud. It's just what this hideous vile man does. He now says biden has to prove no fraud. Maybe because he didnt prove no fraud in 2016 v hilary his presidency is invalid.

 

[Leimonis]

Maybe because he didnt prove no fraud in 2016 v hilary his presidency is invalid.

oh the good old 2016

 

[Frankfooter]

He's more right than you.
Lucy is the villain for pulling away the football and Charlie is a sucker because he keeps thinking she won't do it.

Which is why Dutchie is Charlie, thinking that this time Trump is telling the truth and they have evidence of electoral fraud.

 

[Valcazar]

Which is why Dutchie is Charlie, thinking that this time Trump is telling the truth and they have evidence of electoral fraud.

If the argument is "this time they have real evidence" is Lucy saying "this time I will let you kick the football" then that works, yes.

 

[drc75]

The appeal that was disposed of today was on a very narrow procedural order in the course of seeking injunctive relief (denial of the request of the Trump campaign to amend the application for an injunction). That's why only 3 members of the court sat on the matter. The appeal of the lower court decision on the merits has not yet been heard. No matter, a new complaint can be filed with additional allegations and affidavits, just not in time to prevent certification in the first instance, which was the objective of the first suit.

They sort of need real evidence to do much of anything other than wasting the court's time. Something that they've failed to do.

 

[Valcazar]

They sort of need real evidence to do much of anything other than wasting the court's time. Something that they've failed to do.

I think Dutch Oven may be arguing that you can withhold your evidence and appeal on procedural grounds and then show all the evidence to the Supreme Court since that is the only court big enough for your win to matter.

 

[Fun For All]

I think Dutch Oven may be arguing that you can withhold your evidence and appeal on procedural grounds and then show all the evidence to the Supreme Court since that is the only court big enough for your win to matter.

That would be a dumb strategy...it's like "I'm not gonna play my best players until game 7"...

 

[basketcase]

The most sadistic people who have committed the most heinous of crimes, pick any one you want, have all had legal representation to speak for them...even Potato Head.

The difference here is Trump is the litigant, not the defendant.

 

[basketcase]

You can't even interpret Peanuts correctly, why do you think you know the law better than anyone else?

Charlie Brown is a sympathetic character.

Maybe a psychedelic reboot where Charlie is a heroin addicted conman who imagines there are football to kick.

 

[Fun For All]

The difference here is Trump is the litigant, not the defendant.

Ok...Trump still is allowed to have representation to present his nonsense...Jenna Ellis is just doing a job.

 

[Fun For All]

Charlie Brown is a sympathetic character.

Maybe a psychedelic reboot where Charlie is a heroin addicted conman who imagines there are football to kick.

 

[Valcazar]

Ok...Trump still is allowed to have representation to present his nonsense...Jenna Ellis is just doing a job.

Ethical lawyers do not present bullshit to the court.

 

[Perry Mason]

The difference here is Trump is the litigant, not the defendant.

Now... what the fuck does that mean!?

Perry