#TrumpMugShot

look how cute you are thinking I’m arguing with you. You have to actually say something interesting and intelligent first.

 

Over inflated ego? Not a crime. Inability to let things go? Not a crime. Sure. Filing 61 electing lawsuits is crazy, it’s not a crime even if you go 0 for 61.

Know what just might be crimes? Scheming to have fake electors fraudulently claim that they are the certified electors in a state - and laughably submit their forged documents to the national archives? (I guess on this one, they wanted to make sure it was a crime).

American Oversight Obtains Seven Phony Certificates of Pro-Trump Electors - American Oversight

How about: Pressuring the Vice President to fraudulently “overturn” an election? How about plotting a protest event to disrupt the certification process, whipping that mob into a frenzy, and when you see your mob attack and seek to hang the VP who “betrayed” you, instead of doing anything to stop it, you tweet out “this is what happens…”? How about pressuring several states to either “find” votes (Georgia) or to disenfranchise entire cities (Michigan)? All these things actually are crimes. One person is the common nexus. Georgia is on the right path trying it as a RICO case, might get a few guilty pleas. I saw that speculated right after the events that it could be RICO, I assume Smith isn’t going that route just because it would be too massive. You’d have literally dozens if not hundreds of Republican criminals brought in if the feds went RICO. Even the 19 in Georgia is a tall task, but the other states that had “fake electors” schemes need to do similar.

 

Trump filed 61 lawsuits? News to me. Link?

 

actually, no they’re not.

 

You have nothing of value to bring to any discussion on this board. A waste of time. I won't suffer fools.

Blocked!

 

Trump actually filed 62 lawsuits. He lost 61. The one he won was to have persons from both parties stand closer to the counting.

I have also been consistent. If there was a case of a rogue state official deciding an election on his own, that would be election interference. And states have checks and balances to ensure this doesn't happen. In Arizona, elections are run on a county level. And each count is certified and agreed upon by county officials, in the presence of both a D and R rep. Then the count is certified by the Secretary of State, before signed as official by the Governor.

If a rogue Secretary of State in Arizona decided to flip an election on his own, there would be immediate lawsuits from the counties. And if the Secretary of State had no evidence of fraud to change the outcome,I would hope they would be indicted.

I've seen you have also dropped the 1960 Hawaii argument. Good. There is no comparison. Both sets of 1960 Hawaii electors were certified by the state contingent upon the results of the recount. Similar to what PA did in 2020.

In contrast, there were no contingencies for the fake electors in GA, MI, or AZ. They claimed to be the one, true set. And the scheme was to have Pence illegally not accept the real set of electors, and push things back to the state legislatures.

This plan may not have even worked in AZ. Remember Rusty Bowers? He was the State Senate President (Republican), who exposed the past of the scheme about sending things back to the state. He probably would not have let the AZ legislature vote for Trump.

 

Sorry, it was actually 62. I guess he went 1-61.

If you were trying to play semantics, because on many of those cases the Trump campaign (not Trump personally) or some other Trump aligned group was the recorded plaintiff, sorry… not interested in playing.

 

I didn’t drop any argument that I made about the 1960 election, because I didn’t make an argument. What is it about your side of the fence that believes responding to a question necessarily is an argument. I’m truly happy for you that you have an opinion that you don’t believe the 1960 election add false collectors. Everybody’s entitled to his opinion.

you did alter your position on certification. This is what you said.

In Georgia, the Sec of State alone certifies the election results according to State Law. In my hypo I said all facts remain the same. With the benefit of hindsight you seem to suggest the SOS could not certify Trump the winner. But you don’t get hindsight. My hypo proffered what if the SOS did certify Trump…then what? That is what will be litigated. It’s a constitutional question which has never been litigated. The 12 Amendment is not clear, which is why there is a debate. Regardless, your assertion above is certainly wrong as to its absolutism, and possibly wrong as the VP or Congress may have the authority to send them back.

 

I don’t play with the truth, so you should think before you post falsities. BTW, the majority, if not all, of the lawsuits you reference were dismissed for lack of standing, not on the merits. So your underlying narrative of “fully litigated” is a laughable assertion which has no resemblance to truth.

 

Yes, many were dismissed for standing. That tends to happen with “spaghetti against the wall” legal strategy. Doesn’t mean there was a chance any of the dismissed cases had merit.

Keep hanging in there. I’m sure Powel, Ellis, Giuliani et al. will “release the Kraken” any time now.

 

uhmmm, lack of standing has zero to do with the litigation method you are trying to reference. They are actually inapposite.

 

If a Secretary of State goes rogue, then the lawsuits would be filed immediately. And the courts would step in and decide based on evidence. Courts are the proper places for disputes like this to be settled, and how many cases did Trump win on merit again in 2020?

The VP and Congress has to standing to reject the states electors in my opinion. Judge Luttig agrees with me.

The only responsibility and power of the Vice President under the Constitution is to faithfully count the electoral college votes as they have been cast,”
​

As for your Hawaii argument, I asked for examples from the other side. 1960 was your reply. Itv was your "proof" the other side does the same. That makes it part of your argument the other side did it too. But it's a poor argument, because the two sets of Hawaii electors in 1960 were both certified contingent upon the outcome of the recount. No second set of electors were ever certified in any state in 2020, and in several states, the fake electors claimed to be the true set. And a scheme was hatched, from Trump on down, to have the VP abuse his power by rejecting duly certified electors, throwing things back to the states, where they would nullify the results of the election, and select the fake sets.

 

So this chart is saying that the deficit at the end of Obama’s first year was more than three times the deficit at the end of Bush’s term?

The problem with the chart is, we don’t know when in the year that number is being registered. I assume the bar represents the end of the given year, but that’s not clear.

The chart needs more annotation. For example, I assume the spike at the end, represents all the money spent on Covid.

 

Year 2009 in the graph was discussed in posts #110 and #111 above.

 

Just speaking for myself when I refer to the lawsuits I use the phrase "by Trump or on behalf of Trump" although it probably would have been even more accurate to add "by supporters of Trump". In any event it's a distinction without a real difference since the ultimate party in interest was the defeated former president.
FYI: Here's a link and the number was actually 62 rather than 61.
Trump's failed efforts to overturn the election by the numbers

The president and his allies filed 62 lawsuits in state and federal courts seeking to overturn election results in states the president lost, according to Marc Elias, a Democratic election lawyer who is tracking the outcomes.
Out of the 62 lawsuits filed challenging the presidential election, 61 have failed, according to Elias.

Some cases were dismissed for lack of standing and others based on the merits of the voter fraud allegations. The decisions have came from both Democratic-appointed and Republican-appointed judges – including federal judges appointed by Trump.​

 

your assertion that a lawsuit filed by a “Trump supporter” as you call them is the same as Trump himself filing a lawsuit is just silly. There’s zero basis for saying that.

 

Legally it's not the same, effectively the objective was the same, to invalidate enough votes cast in favor of Biden to change the final result. It doesn't make any difference whether Trump himself was the plaintiff or whether the lawsuit was filed by a member of an organization supporting Trump in a particular state.