3 ms·

Thrown out due to Laches and lack of standing or lack of injury. Evidence was never actually heard in any courtroom. Not a single witness affidavit made it int

Thrown out due to Laches and lack of standing or lack of injury. Evidence was never actually heard in any courtroom. Not a single witness affidavit made it into a courtroom. This is why people are angry. But continue to dismiss, continue to ignore. Trump was just Hindenburg. I fear what comes next.

gambiting 6y ago
>>Thrown out due to Laches and lack of standing or lack of injury. I don't know what "Laches" is? Besides, >> Evidence was never actually heard in any courtroom Well, that is a lie, many of his cases were thrown out due to lack of evidence and lack of witnesses willing to actually testify to anything. Guess where does that happen? In a courtroom. Where a judge looks at the case and decides whether to proceed with it or not. So all of these cases had their time in court, to say otherwise is just a lie. You, like many other people, seem to operate under the assumption that you first start a case, everyone gathers and then you present evidence. That's not true, at least not in the US it isn't. Evidence has to be presented when you file to open the case, and since there wasn't any, judges have dismissed the cases. Why would they continue? So they could gather in an empty room listening to...nothing? Evidence can be admitted to the case later, with the permission of a judge, but you can't just start a case with nothing in the first place, which is what Trump and his team were doing. https://www.ft.com/content/20b114b5-5419-493b-9923-a918a2527931 https://www.ft.com/content/20b114b5-5419-493b-9923-a918a2527... >>But continue to dismiss, continue to ignore Well, thanks but I won't, I think people trying to steal an election should be in jail, so my wish for 2021 is that we see trump and his cronies where they need to be - in prison. Either because of the election, or because of his many other crimes, I'm really not going to be fussy about it, he's done enought to spend rest of his life behind bars, attorneys everywhere will have enough to bring him to justice. >>Trump was just Hindenburg Hindenburg represented the complete collapse and end of the entire airship industry, it has crashed and burnt and with it the entire trust and reputation these ships had. And it crashed and burnt because people in charge of building them wilfully ignored the dangers of building flying ships filled with explosive gas. So yeah, I think this is a very apt comparison to trump - just probably not in the way you intend.
- pjc50 6y ago
  > >>Trump was just Hindenburg > Hindenburg represented the complete collapse and end of the entire airship industry Wrong Hindenburg I think, although this one crashed and burned just as badly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_von_Hindenburg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_von_Hindenburg I'm not sure who's supposed to be whom in this analogy, maybe that some other Republican is supposed to be Hitler? Oh and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity) ; no comment on whether that's actually relevant or what happened. Edit: so this is fun, https://twitter.com/Elaijuh/status/1347205394393927697 https://twitter.com/Elaijuh/status/1347205394393927697 Trump campaign lawyer throws him under the bus "“client has used the lawyer’s services to perpetrate a crime and the client insists upon taking action that the lawyer considers repugnant”"
glenstein 6y ago
Numerous cases had their merits scrutinized and soundly rejected, such as the one against Wisconsin Election Commission. Moreover you aren't entitled to have your "evidence" heard when you're invoking non-existent legal rights (such as one state overturning the results of another state, or asking a state legislature to decide instead of letting the votes stand), and no one should take the word of random person in a comment thread over the collective consensus of 60+ cases rejecting every legal theory Trump's team put forward. There's a basic pattern with all of this. Someone insists Trump had a legitimate grievance, it leads down an obscure rabbit hole of tangled facts and interpretations that, when investigated, turns out to be a series of confusions, basic misundertandings, insane theories of law fundamentally incompatible with Democracy, and in some cases willful misrepresentation of the facts. Trump's legal team was largely incompetent, and invoked non-existent legal rights and authorities to challenge valid election results, and were appropriately dismissed.
rualca 6y ago
> Thrown out due to (...) You should really consider the facts instead of baseless claims repeated ad-nauseum. Meanwhile, keep in mind that Trump himself, whenever asked to present any proof that substantiate any of his wild outlandish claims, falls back to the convenient excuse that his proof needs to be kept secret and away from the public to not be untarnished. Trump does this continuously, even in his infamous Georgia tphone call with fellow Republicans when they stated quite bluntly that they had absolutely zero evidence to review election claims and directly requested Trump to help them out and hand out any evidence as a last resort effort. Now as yourself this: if Trump is days before Biden is sworn in, without any election fraud claim being shown to be valid or realistic, and when fellow Republicans beg him for some evidence to support his claims for them to be able to mount any semblance of a case... Why on earth would he still refuse to share any info at all?

gambiting 6y ago

>>Thrown out due to Laches and lack of standing or lack of injury. I don't know what "Laches" is? Besides, >> Evidence was never actually heard in any courtroom Well, that is a lie, many of his cases were thrown out due to lack of evidence and lack of witnesses willing to actually testify to anything. Guess where does that happen? In a courtroom. Where a judge looks at the case and decides whether to proceed with it or not. So all of these cases had their time in court, to say otherwise is just a lie. You, like many other people, seem to operate under the assumption that you first start a case, everyone gathers and then you present evidence. That's not true, at least not in the US it isn't. Evidence has to be presented when you file to open the case, and since there wasn't any, judges have dismissed the cases. Why would they continue? So they could gather in an empty room listening to...nothing? Evidence can be admitted to the case later, with the permission of a judge, but you can't just start a case with nothing in the first place, which is what Trump and his team were doing. https://www.ft.com/content/20b114b5-5419-493b-9923-a918a2527931 https://www.ft.com/content/20b114b5-5419-493b-9923-a918a2527... >>But continue to dismiss, continue to ignore Well, thanks but I won't, I think people trying to steal an election should be in jail, so my wish for 2021 is that we see trump and his cronies where they need to be - in prison. Either because of the election, or because of his many other crimes, I'm really not going to be fussy about it, he's done enought to spend rest of his life behind bars, attorneys everywhere will have enough to bring him to justice. >>Trump was just Hindenburg Hindenburg represented the complete collapse and end of the entire airship industry, it has crashed and burnt and with it the entire trust and reputation these ships had. And it crashed and burnt because people in charge of building them wilfully ignored the dangers of building flying ships filled with explosive gas. So yeah, I think this is a very apt comparison to trump - just probably not in the way you intend.

pjc50 6y ago
> >>Trump was just Hindenburg > Hindenburg represented the complete collapse and end of the entire airship industry Wrong Hindenburg I think, although this one crashed and burned just as badly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_von_Hindenburg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_von_Hindenburg I'm not sure who's supposed to be whom in this analogy, maybe that some other Republican is supposed to be Hitler? Oh and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity) ; no comment on whether that's actually relevant or what happened. Edit: so this is fun, https://twitter.com/Elaijuh/status/1347205394393927697 https://twitter.com/Elaijuh/status/1347205394393927697 Trump campaign lawyer throws him under the bus "“client has used the lawyer’s services to perpetrate a crime and the client insists upon taking action that the lawyer considers repugnant”"

glenstein 6y ago

Numerous cases had their merits scrutinized and soundly rejected, such as the one against Wisconsin Election Commission. Moreover you aren't entitled to have your "evidence" heard when you're invoking non-existent legal rights (such as one state overturning the results of another state, or asking a state legislature to decide instead of letting the votes stand), and no one should take the word of random person in a comment thread over the collective consensus of 60+ cases rejecting every legal theory Trump's team put forward. There's a basic pattern with all of this. Someone insists Trump had a legitimate grievance, it leads down an obscure rabbit hole of tangled facts and interpretations that, when investigated, turns out to be a series of confusions, basic misundertandings, insane theories of law fundamentally incompatible with Democracy, and in some cases willful misrepresentation of the facts. Trump's legal team was largely incompetent, and invoked non-existent legal rights and authorities to challenge valid election results, and were appropriately dismissed.

rualca 6y ago

> Thrown out due to (...) You should really consider the facts instead of baseless claims repeated ad-nauseum. Meanwhile, keep in mind that Trump himself, whenever asked to present any proof that substantiate any of his wild outlandish claims, falls back to the convenient excuse that his proof needs to be kept secret and away from the public to not be untarnished. Trump does this continuously, even in his infamous Georgia tphone call with fellow Republicans when they stated quite bluntly that they had absolutely zero evidence to review election claims and directly requested Trump to help them out and hand out any evidence as a last resort effort. Now as yourself this: if Trump is days before Biden is sworn in, without any election fraud claim being shown to be valid or realistic, and when fellow Republicans beg him for some evidence to support his claims for them to be able to mount any semblance of a case... Why on earth would he still refuse to share any info at all?