Click here to close
New Message Alert
Not So


Not So  

  Click Here to have an E-mail Sent to you when a new message is added to this thread
Author: bladeslap   Date: 7/18/2021 7:30:17 PM  +2/-0   Show Orig. Msg (this window) Or  In New Window

 


These are teh facts:


Trump Lost the Popular vote (Biggly) (74 million to 81 million)


Trump lost every single indepdent recount 


Trump lost every single court case - The judges threw every one out and said "No merit"


Trump lost court cases with federal judges he put in himself


Trump lost at the supreme court


Trump lost his tax case at the supreme court


Trump's recount in Wisconsin netted Biden even more votes


Some of Trump's lawyers are now being challenged in court or have been suspended from practicing law for overtly lying in court about the "stop the steal" campaign


Here's some more reading material:





    • In Pennsylvania, US District Judge Matthew Brann, a former senior Republican official, denied the Trump campaign's request to invalidate millions of Pennsylvania mail ballots, issuing a blistering opinion comparing the lawsuit to "Frankenstein's monster."A Pennsylvania appeals court panel in a 3-0 vote rejected the campaign's request to reverse Brann's decision. "Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so," Judge Stephanos Bibas, another Trump appointee, wrote in a sharply-worded opinion that was joined by the panel's two other judges, both of whom are Republican appointees. "Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here. The Campaign's claims have no merit." Bibas added: "Voters, not lawyers, choose the President."

      • Brann criticized the Trump legal team, led by Giuliani, for presenting the court with "strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpaid in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence," and said he would not "disenfranchise" 7 million Pennsylvania voters as a result.




    • In Georgia, US District Judge Steven Grimberg, another Trump appointee, rejected the Republican lawyer Lin Wood's request to halt the certification of votes in the state, alleging that Georgia's Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, hurt him as a voter by agreeing to a settlement over signature matching on ballots in March.In Wisconsin, yet another Trump judicial appointee, US District Judge Brett Ludwig, threw out the president's lawsuit seeking to void Biden's victory in the state. "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 has allowed plaintiff the chance to make his case and he has lost on the merits."

      • When dismissing Wood's suit, Grimberg wrote, "To halt the certification at literally the eleventh hour would breed confusion and disenfranchisement that I find have no basis in fact and law."






  • On Friday, the Supreme Court handed Trump his biggest defeat yet when it issued a terse order declining to hear a case brought by Texas that sought to throw out the election results in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia over unsubstantiated allegations of widespread voter fraud. Trump repeatedly hyped the case as being "the big one."


    • Texas' Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton, filed the lawsuit and was backed by 18 other GOP attorneys general as well as a majority of House Republicans. It was the most brazen and far-fetched attempt yet by the party to ignore the will of the voters, overturn the results of a free and fair election, and reinstall Trump as president.

    • In a one-page opinion, the Supreme Court said that "Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections."

    • Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas disagreed with the other seven justices on whether the Supreme Court should have allowed Texas to file its complaint, based on their long-held view that as a matter of judicial procedure, the Supreme Court should always hear cases in which states sue each other. But Alito noted that even if he had heard the case, he "would not grant other relief," meaning he would have denied Texas' request to invalidate Biden's victory in four other states.


  • ---


 
    Return-To-Index   Display Full Msg Thread  FLAG This Message