U.S. Supreme Court Dumps Last Of Trump's Election Appeals

[Shabibilicious]

U.S. Supreme Court dumps last of Trump's election appeals

Lawrence Hurley

Mon, March 8, 2021, 9:49 AM

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday disposed of the last of three cases brought to the justices by former President Donald Trump challenging his election loss, bringing a muted end to his futile quest in the courts to hold onto power.

The court without comment rejected Trump's appeal challenging thousands of absentee ballots filed in Wisconsin, an election battleground that the Republican businessman-turned-politician lost to Democrat Joe Biden by more than 20,000 votes. Biden became president on Jan. 20.

 

It was the last of three petitions filed at the Supreme Court near the end of Trump's presidency that the justices declined to take up. The court on Feb. 22 turned away Trump's other two appeals - a second Wisconsin challenge and one relating to voting in Pennsylvania, another pivotal state Trump lost. Lower courts previously had ruled against Trump in those three cases.

It already was clear that the high court, which includes three justices appointed by Trump, had no intention to intervene in the cases and others filed by his allies because it did not act before Congress on Jan. 6 certified Biden's victory. That formal certification was interrupted when a pro-Trump mob stormed the U.S. Capitol.

In the Wisconsin case, Trump sued two days after the state had certified its election results. He challenged several Wisconsin election policies including one allowing the use of drop boxes for absentee ballots during the COVID-19 pandemic. Both a federal judge and the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the claims, noting in part that Trump had waited too long to sue.

Courts around the country rejected the cases brought by Trump and his allies, sometimes in colorful terms. A judge put it this way in November in rejecting a Trump challenge in Pennsylvania: "This claim, like Frankenstein's Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together."

Trump has made - and continues to make - false claims that the Nov. 3 presidential election was stolen from him through widespread voting fraud and irregularities. Republicans are now seizing on those same unsubstantiated allegations in an effort to impose new voting restrictions in numerous states.

The Supreme Court on Monday also turned away another election-related case filed by Trump ally Lin Wood, who had asked the justices to block the Jan. 5 Senate runoff elections in Georgia. The court never acted on the request and Democrats won both races, giving them narrow control of the Senate.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/u-supreme-court-dumps-last-144904229.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

Still several in the que...   

CL

[yota691]

Far from over...Again Fake News from the Hate Everything America Party...

[Shabibilicious]

How Trump’s Judges Stuck a Pin in the ‘Stop the Steal’ Balloon

Jake Whitney

Sun, March 14, 2021, 5:07 AM

 

 

Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty

On Monday, the last judicial shoe dropped on Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election when the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his third and final high court challenge. As America transitions to a Biden presidency, the court’s ruling exemplifies why the judiciary is our nation’s strongest bulwark against authoritarianism. Indeed, during the biggest threat to our democracy in modern history, the American court system was our last line of defense, proving, as Andrew Jackson once wrote, “All the rights secured to the citizens under the Constitution are worth nothing...except guaranteed to them by an independent and virtuous judiciary.”

When Donald Trump left office in January as a one-term president, he had nonetheless made a vast impact on the American court system. In four years, Trump had appointed 226 justices to the federal bench, including 54 to the appellate court. This latter number is just one justice fewer than Barack Obama appointed to that court in his entire eight years as president. Of the nation's 13 federal appeals courts, Trump succeeded in flipping three from liberal to conservative majorities. His three Supreme Court justices, meanwhile, were the most appointed in a single term since Richard Nixon. Indeed, Trump’s mark on the American judiciary will be long-lasting and profound.

 

Which is why it was so significant that Trump’s bogus, execrable claim that the election was “stolen” from him—the “Big Lie” as many have called it—was unequivocally, even contemptuously, repudiated by the courts. In doing so, the American judiciary saved our democracy. That may sound hyperbolic, but in an age so politically volatile that members of the American right wing plotted to kidnap a governor, broke into the U.S. Capitol, and believed the Democratic party was being led by Satan-worshipping cannibals, the judiciary proved our only institution immune to the virulent hyper-partisanship infecting this country. It managed to maintain, if just barely, the legitimacy of both political parties.

But here’s the really interesting thing: It was because of, not in spite of, Trump’s influence on the judiciary that the peaceful transfer of power was ensured. Sound crazy? Imagine if the courts, like Congress and the media, had split along partisan lines—with Democratic appointees ruling against Trump’s election challenges and Republican appointees ruling in favor. Imagine further that no Trump appointees had heard the cases. The right wing, already aflame with conspiracy theories, would have considered the entire process a sham. Worse, a partisan split would have instilled an even deeper sense among all Americans that the country possessed no objective arbiter—that truth was only what our respective political leaders deemed it to be.

Mass insurrection, at the very least, or a Trump coup, at the very worst, would have been the result. The Capitol riot on Jan. 6 was the match ready to light the conflagration.

We were spared these outcomes only because of the bipartisan nature of the court decisions and because Trump-appointed justices heard key cases: in more than 60 post-election lawsuits, a total of 86 judges—including 38 Republican appointees and eight chosen by Trump himself—rejected the election challenges. Even the Supreme Court, with one-third of the justices appointed by Trump, ruled against him. Not a single Trump appointee on any court voted to support his fraud claims.

This clear repudiation had powerful effects. It forced several of Trump’s most high-ranking supporters to finally admit that the election had not, in fact, been stolen. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell had for weeks refused to acknowledge Biden’s win. He referred to him as “President-elect” only after state electors officially voted, which followed the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear a Trump challenge. Even William Barr, Trump’s sycophantic head of the Justice Department, finally admitted in early December, after election challenges were rejected en masse, that there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Reversals like these further delegitimized the “Stop the Steal” movement and threw cold water on pro-Trump groups ready to act on his incendiary claims. (According to the FBI, right-wing militias planned armed protests in all 50 state capitols. They never materialized.)

While many Trump supporters still believe he won the election—according to a January survey, over 70 percent of Republicans believed Trump received more votes than Biden—when confronted with the fact that even Trump-appointed justices rejected the fraud claims, their charges of a Democratic conspiracy became much harder to sell. Two unconvincing explanations landed in my newsfeed: one was that the courts were “mired in the Deep State;” the other was that the judges had been “paid off.” These are ridiculous, of course. Trump-appointed justices could hardly have been more scathing or thorough in their rebukes.

“A sitting president who did not prevail in his bid for re-election has asked for federal court help in setting aside the popular vote,” wrote Brett H. Ludwig, a Trump-appointed District Court judge in Wisconsin. Ludwig called Trump’s election challenge “bizarre” and added, “This court allowed the plaintiff the chance to make his case, and he has lost on the merits.” Steven Grimberg, a Trump-appointed district court judge in Georgia, wrote, “To halt the certification at literally the 11th hour would breed confusion and potentially disenfranchisement that I find has no basis in fact or in law.”

Statements like these helped preserve our democracy because virtually every other American institution that could have checked Trump's would-be power grab had either been co-opted by Trump or denigrated to the point of near-impotence. The media was “fake news” propagated by Democrats. The intelligence agencies were led by “Obama holdovers” and stocked with Trump-hating members of the “Deep State.” Most Republican congresspeople, meanwhile, publicly supported the bogus fraud claims. It was even unclear how the military would respond to a power grab as Trump had filled key leadership posts with cronies. (Congressional hearings on the Jan. 6 riot revealed that it took the Pentagon more than three hours to approve Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund’s request for help from the D.C. National Guard. Top Army leadership, including the brother of Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn, pushed back against the request, Sund testified.)

On Feb. 13, the U.S. Senate had the opportunity to fulfill its duty as a check on executive misconduct. Days earlier, the House of Representatives had sent the upper chamber its second articles of impeachment against President Trump. This historic second impeachment charged Trump with “incitement of insurrection” for the Capitol riot. House managers argued that Trump had “encouraged and cultivated violence” in order to overturn a free and fair presidential election. Rep. Liz Cheney called Trump’s actions “the greatest betrayal of the presidential oath in the history of the United States.” The Senate voted 57-43 to convict, but that was 10 votes shy of the two-thirds supermajority necessary to do so.

The vote was by no means an exoneration—seven Republicans and two independents joined the majority, making it the largest bipartisan vote to convict in U.S. history—but a conviction would have been an unmistakable deterrent to future presidents who would wield such autocratic tactics. Moreover, the acquittal, like the one following Trump’s first impeachment, emboldened him. On Feb. 17, following weeks of silence, the former president was back in the media floating the same bogus claims that more than 60 court cases had already shot down. In an interview with Newsmax, Trump repeated his fallacious refrain: “It was a stolen, fixed, rigged election.”

But fortunately, in this instance, the president was not the decider. The courts were. And unlike the electorate, the justices were unified in their opinions. As Justice Stephanos Bibas of the Third Circuit wrote in response to a challenge by the president who appointed him: “Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”

 

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-judges-stuck-pin-stop-090757371.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

There are still some proceedings working their way through the courts....

 

Common sense still leaves me wondering.....I keep coming back to that 14 million votes more than Obama that Joe recieved.....(and Joe didn't campaign).....while Joe carried 244 fewer counties.....it just doesn't add up......

 

If you follow the money in Georgia, that should leave you scratching your head as well as the Loeffler aid, who was also the Govenors daughters boyfriend having an untimely death....

 

And of course the Michigan mess.....

 

I have believed in the integrity of the system and worked its process during the election cycles for a long time.....

 

I no longer believe in the system.....it is broken.... 

 

CL

 

https://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/284048-the-case-for-decertification-of-michigan-election-results/

 

 

https://dinarvets.com/forums/index.php?/topic/284013-lin-woodfollow-the-money/

 

[MyLadiesDaddy]

On 3/8/2021 at 2:13 PM, Shabibilicious said:

The court without comment rejected Trump's appeal challenging thousands of absentee ballots

AGAIN!!!!!!

Rejected WITHOUT ever looking at one piece of evidence. The COWARDS of the Clown Court of the Ununited and Democratic divided States of America have been bought off by the CCP and are held in check by the Democratic Communist party which has the pictures of Roberts raping little children.

 

Something all Democrats can celebrate. 

[Shabibilicious]

Tape of Trump and Georgia officials ‘was found in trash of investigator’s laptop’

Stuti Mishra

Mon, March 15, 2021, 10:00 AM·2 min read

 

 

File Image: Trump’s leaked audio with Georgia investigator was almost deleted, reveals a report

(REUTERS)

The leaked audio call between Donald Trump and the Georgia election investigator, in which he is being heard pressuring her to find proof of poll fraud, was allegedly recovered from the trash folder of her device, a recent report has found.

The six-minute recording of a phone call between the former president and investigator Frances Watson that took place on 23 December, was published by the Wall Street Journal last week. Earlier, the Washington Post also reported on the substance of the calls.

In the recording, Mr Trump can be heard telling the investigator to find proof of election fraud in Georgia before “the very important date," referring to the 20 January inauguration of president Joe Biden.

 

Now, CNN has cited a Georgia official as saying that the recording of the audio was located in the trash folder of Ms Watson’s device.

It was also reported that officials in Georgia earlier claimed the recording of the call didn’t exist. The leaked audio is more proof of the former president’s extraordinary attempts to convince officials to help him find evidence for his baseless claims of voter fraud.

Mr Trump, who filed over 50 lawsuits and repeatedly claimed the elections were unfair, told Ms Watson to find “the right answer” and that she would be "praised" for overturning the results.

Encouraging her to look for discrepancies in her signature check for absentee ballots, Mr Trump said: "But if you go back two years, and if you can get to Fulton, you are going to find things that are going to be unbelievable.”

"The dishonesty that we’ve heard from. But Fulton is the mother lode," the former president said.

 

Mr Trump also told Ms Watson that he hoped "we" could win Georgia and that "you have the most important job in the country right now."

Later, in January, Mr Trump called and pressured the Republican secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to find evidence of voter fraud. Audio of that call was also leaked.

There’s a criminal investigation ongoing in Mr Trump’s attempts to influence officials in an attempt to overturn election results. The state of Georgia is also conducting an independent probe into it.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/tape-trump-georgia-officials-found-102352793.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

49 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

Tape of Trump and Georgia officials ‘was found in trash of investigator’s laptop’

Stuti Mishra

Mon, March 15, 2021, 10:00 AM·2 min read

 

 

File Image: Trump’s leaked audio with Georgia investigator was almost deleted, reveals a report

(REUTERS)

The leaked audio call between Donald Trump and the Georgia election investigator, in which he is being heard pressuring her to find proof of poll fraud, was allegedly recovered from the trash folder of her device, a recent report has found.

The six-minute recording of a phone call between the former president and investigator Frances Watson that took place on 23 December, was published by the Wall Street Journal last week. Earlier, the Washington Post also reported on the substance of the calls.

In the recording, Mr Trump can be heard telling the investigator to find proof of election fraud in Georgia before “the very important date," referring to the 20 January inauguration of president Joe Biden.

 

Now, CNN has cited a Georgia official as saying that the recording of the audio was located in the trash folder of Ms Watson’s device.

It was also reported that officials in Georgia earlier claimed the recording of the call didn’t exist. The leaked audio is more proof of the former president’s extraordinary attempts to convince officials to help him find evidence for his baseless claims of voter fraud.

Mr Trump, who filed over 50 lawsuits and repeatedly claimed the elections were unfair, told Ms Watson to find “the right answer” and that she would be "praised" for overturning the results.

Encouraging her to look for discrepancies in her signature check for absentee ballots, Mr Trump said: "But if you go back two years, and if you can get to Fulton, you are going to find things that are going to be unbelievable.”

"The dishonesty that we’ve heard from. But Fulton is the mother lode," the former president said.

 

Mr Trump also told Ms Watson that he hoped "we" could win Georgia and that "you have the most important job in the country right now."

Later, in January, Mr Trump called and pressured the Republican secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to find evidence of voter fraud. Audio of that call was also leaked.

There’s a criminal investigation ongoing in Mr Trump’s attempts to influence officials in an attempt to overturn election results. The state of Georgia is also conducting an independent probe into it.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/tape-trump-georgia-officials-found-102352793.html

 

GO RV, then BV

 

If a sitting President is asking a Government employee.....even at the State level.....to do their job.....show me how that is a crime?

 

Lin Wood was one of the premier Attorneys in America......known for his humble honesty and integrity.....once he took up for Trump the Cancel Culture Left and MSM have worked very hard to destroy him.......

 

In the 15 minute audio above the corrupt activities that occurred in Georgia are laid out very clearly.....   

CL

[MyLadiesDaddy]

On 3/8/2021 at 9:18 PM, yota691 said:

Far from over...Again Fake News from the Hate Everything America Party...

I've come to the realization that these liberals don't just hate everything America, they just hate EVERYTHING. 

 

There're miserable, they hate their own lives which is why they lash out at everyone and continue to post ridiculous baseless garbage about the former president. These liberals must do what they otherwise their lives have no meaning. 

[Shabibilicious]

3 hours ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

AGAIN!!!!!!

Rejected WITHOUT ever looking at one piece of evidence. The COWARDS of the Clown Court of the Ununited and Democratic divided States of America have been bought off by the CCP and are held in check by the Democratic Communist party which has the pictures of Roberts raping little children.

 

Something all Democrats can celebrate. 

 

2 Biden court losses just over a month into his presidency show Trump's lasting power on the judiciary

Azmi Haroun

Wed, March 10, 2021, 3:23 PM

 

 

 

Getty Images/naruecha jenthaisong

• Trump-appointed federal judges have blocked two of the Biden administration's early efforts.

• After a deportation moratorium was blocked in Texas, a different Texas judge blocked the CDC's eviction ban.

• With over 230 federal judges appointed by Trump, the court battles will likely endure.

Days after a federal judge indefinitely blocked the Biden administration from enforcing a 100-day deportation freeze, another federal judge in Texas struck down the CDC's eviction moratorium.

These two losses - from judges appointed by former President Donald Trump - show his lasting legacy on the judiciary and how that could impact the Biden administration.

During Trump's four years in office - and with a Republican Senate majority - the former president appointed more than 230 federal judges across states, which, according to Pew Research Center, is nearly as many federal judges as Barack Obama appointed in his eight years in office.

 

And less than two months into Biden's presidency, Trump's lasting impact on the federal judiciary is becoming apparent.

In February, US District Judge Drew Tipton appointed by Trump in June 2020, granted a preliminary injunction to halt the Biden administration's moratorium indefinitely.

The decision was also a legal win for Trump ally Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who originally filed the lawsuit against the Biden administration days after the administration issued a memo to the Department of Homeland Security.

The Biden administration has not stated whether it will immediately appeal the ruling. The Justice Department did not seek a stay on Tipton's January temporary restraining order on the moratorium.

On February 26, Campbell Barker, a Trump-appointed federal district judge in the Eastern District of Texas, ruled that the federal government did not have the authority to place a national ban on evictions during the pandemic.

Barker's 21-page summary judgment called the moratorium - which was first imposed by the CDC under the Trump administration in September - unconstitutional and said it, "criminalizes the use of state legal proceedings to vindicate property rights."

In early February, Biden's administration had extended the moratorium through the end of March.

Barker's judgment followed a lawsuit filed in October by a group of Texas landlords, who claimed that they were owed thousands in late rent and that the moratorium violated property rights.

In his decision, Barker claimed that the government's lawyers could not draw connections to where federal officials had instituted bans on evictions, including during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic.

"The federal government has not claimed such a power at any point during our Nation's history until last year," Barker wrote."Although the COVID-19 pandemic persists, so does the Constitution," Barker added.

A new report by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau highlighted that 11 million American families are at risk of eviction or foreclosure due to financial strain from the coronavirus pandemic.

Barker did not issue an injunction in the case, meaning that renters are still offered protection by the CDC's eviction ban for now, but Barker said that he could seek an injunction should the federal government allow the eviction ban to stay in place.

While Trump had an outsized impact on federal judges through his appointments, it is not uncommon for a new administration to face roadblocks from the judiciary - a co-equal branch of government. Throughout his presidency, many of Trump's signature policy goals were challenged and overturned by judges appointed by his predecessors.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/2-biden-court-losses-just-202328065.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[nstoolman1]

Maybe they are doing their job and upholding the Constitution, unlike the SCOTUS. 

[Shabibilicious]

2 minutes ago, nstoolman1 said:

Maybe they are doing their job and upholding the Constitution, unlike the SCOTUS. 

 

I imagine most folks would say they feel as you do when a judicial decision doesn't go their way.....I know I sometimes do.

 

GO RV, then BV

[MyLadiesDaddy]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

I imagine most folks would say they feel as you do when a judicial decision doesn't go their way.....I know I sometimes do.

 

GO RV, then BV

All it shows is how much control that pedophile Roberts has over junior Jurists. Everyone knows that the Chief Justice picks what cases are heard and not heard. 

But continue on with your deception that is what liberals do best. 

[Shabibilicious]

1 minute ago, ladyGrace'sDaddy said:

All it shows is how much control that pedophile Roberts has over junior Jurists. Everyone knows that the Chief Justice picks what cases are heard and not heard. 

But continue on with your deception that is what liberals do best. 

 

Not true, as there are actual guidelines to how the SCOTUS accepts cases....it only takes 3 or 4 justices to vote yes for them to accept a case. 

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shelley]

2 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Not true, as there are actual guidelines to how the SCOTUS accepts cases....it only takes 3 or 4 justices to vote yes for them to accept a case. 

 

GO RV, then BV

Ah it must be nice to think the world works according to rules and laws ??

this brings back so many memories of every judge across the United States including SCOTUS of Mafia buying them all off .... I wonder how many have larger Swiss bank accounts since 

11/4/20 ?

[nstoolman1]

6 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

I imagine most folks would say they feel as you do when a judicial decision doesn't go their way.....I know I sometimes do.

 

GO RV, then BV

Scotus had a duty to judicate the casesTexas and Arizona brought to them. It's their job to try those cases when it is state-to-state. They did not. Therefore they shirked their duties.

[MyLadiesDaddy]

5 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Not true, as there are actual guidelines to how the SCOTUS accepts cases....it only takes 3 or 4 justices to vote yes for them to accept a case. 

 

GO RV, then BV

We all remember the story where an aid heard that child rapist pedophile Roberts yelling at the 3 new Jurists telling them that they would vote as he said. 

You can butter it up all you want but nothing will change the FACT that you and the Democratic Communist party prefer deception and manipulation over honesty every day. 

The fact is not one piece of evidence has ever been seen in ANY court of law. 

FACT!!!!!!

 

[Shabibilicious]

11 hours ago, nstoolman1 said:

Scotus had a duty to judicate the casesTexas and Arizona brought to them. It's their job to try those cases when it is state-to-state. They did not. Therefore they shirked their duties.

 

They weren't hearing a state boundary line dispute, or a natural resource case between states.  Should one state have the right to tell another state how to conduct it's elections?  If they take up that case, then a precedent is set....and then what's next, New York state sues to have Texas change their election procedures, or Cali sues Idaho?  Is that really the can of worms the SCOTUS should be opening?  Careful what you wish for.  As always, just my opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

Washington Post Now Says Trump Never Told Georgia Official to ‘Find the Fraud’

 

Lindsey Ellefson

Mon, March 15, 2021, 4:31 PM

 

 

The Washington Post has corrected a story on Donald Trump to say he never told a Georgia elections investigator in December to “find the fraud” with regards to the presidential election.

The lengthy correction stated, “Two months after publication of this story, the Georgia secretary of state released an audio recording of President Donald Trump’s December phone call with the state’s top elections investigator. The recording revealed that The Post misquoted Trump’s comments on the call, based on information provided by a source.”

It continued, “Trump did not tell the investigator to ‘find the fraud’ or say she would be ‘a national hero’ if she did so. Instead, Trump urged the investigator to scrutinize ballots in Fulton County, Ga., asserting she would find ‘dishonesty’ there. He also told her that she had ‘the most important job in the country right now’ … The headline and text of this story have been corrected to remove quotes misattributed to Trump.”

 

The Jan. 9 story can still be found at its original URL and is now dated March 11 to account for the correction.

The story itself cited “an individual briefed on the call who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the conversation.” The Post also withheld the name of the investigator at the time “because of the risk of threats and harassment directed at election officials.”

This is not to be confused with the Post’s audio recording from Jan. 3 of Trump urging Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to help him overturn the election he lost to President Joe Biden.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/washington-post-now-says-trump-203143859.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[nstoolman1]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

They weren't hearing a state boundary line dispute, or a natural resource case between states.  Should one state have the right to tell another state how to conduct it's elections?  If they take up that case, then a precedent is set....and then what's next, New York state sues to have Texas change their election procedures, or Cali sues Idaho?  Is that really the can of worms the SCOTUS should be opening?  Careful what you wish for.  As always, just my opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

 

 

The lawsuit was to get the Court to enforce the election laws that the State Constitution had in place. A judge changed them. Not a legal change. Only the SCOTUS could stop that. They failed. 

The other states weren't trying to change them only get them to enforce the ones that had.

[Shabibilicious]

2 minutes ago, nstoolman1 said:

 

 

The lawsuit was to get the Court to enforce the election laws that the State Constitution had in place. A judge changed them. Not a legal change. Only the SCOTUS could stop that. They failed. 

The other states weren't trying to change them only get them to enforce the ones that had.

 

Well, the SCOTUS obviously decided the lower courts and State Supreme Courts handled the situations and didn't need to be adjudicated at the Federal level.  I would understand the upheaval among conservatives if the SCOTUS was liberal heavy, but that is not the case...as it has been hand molded by DJT himself.  

 

GO RV, then BV  

[nstoolman1]

2 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Well, the SCOTUS obviously decided the lower courts and State Supreme Courts handled the situations and didn't need to be adjudicated at the Federal level.  I would understand the upheaval among conservatives if the SCOTUS was liberal heavy, but that is not the case...as it has been hand molded by DJT himself.  

 

GO RV, then BV  

 

No, it did not because the lower court judge is who said it was ok to mass mail out ballots along with the SoS.

Ilegally mind you. You conveniently ignore facts and key on non truths. Roberts controlls the Court. Deny it all you want.  He is no friend of the Constitution. 

[Shabibilicious]

5 minutes ago, nstoolman1 said:

 

No, it did not because the lower court judge is who said it was ok to mass mail out ballots along with the SoS.

Ilegally mind you. You conveniently ignore facts and key on non truths. Roberts controlls the Court. Deny it all you want.  He is no friend of the Constitution. 

 

But the GOP controlled Pennsylvania House changed the voting laws in their state, not a judge....Are you saying the judge should have told the State House they couldn't do that, and that's why he gets the blame?

 

GO RV, then BV

[fancy]

Now it starts

Georgia Judge Indicates He May Unseal Absentee Ballots for Fraud Probe

A Fulton county worker continues to count absentee ballots at State Farm Arena on November 6, 2020 in Atlanta, Georgia. (Jessica McGowan/Getty Images)

By Jeffrey Rodack    |   Tuesday, 16 March 2021 08:07 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Comment|

Print|

    A   A

 

 

 

A judge in Georgia is signaling he may unseal Fulton County absentee ballots so a government watchdog investigation into claims of voting fraud in the November election can proceed.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported the case stems from a lawsuit alleging fraudulent ballots were cast and other irregularities took place as workers tabulated ballots on election night in Fulton County. The newspaper noted the claims had already been investigated by the Georgia secretary of state’s office and dismissed.

However, Henry County Superior County Judge Brian Amero, who is presiding over the case, said Monday he’s inclined to order the ballots unsealed to permit a review by experts hired by Garland Favorito, a voting-integrity advocate, who filed the lawsuit.

"We want to do this in such a way that dispels rumors and disinformation and sheds light," Amero said at a hearing. "The devil’s in the details."

Favorito alleges absentee ballots in Fulton County may have been fabricated by county workers and some ballots counted multiple times on election night. His lawsuit cites video of the count and includes sworn statements from some who were present.

The Journal-Constitution said the observers were suspicious of ballots that were printed on a different stock of paper than regular ballots and others appearing to have been printed instead of marked by ink in a voter’s hand.

Amero also discussed a protective order prohibiting Favorito’s experts from revealing their work without permission from the court. If Amero does follow through with permitting the review, a special master would be appointed to oversee it. A review of the ballots could begin in late April, the newspaper said.

 

 

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/georgia-judge-absentee-ballots-unsealed/2021/03/16/id/1013971/

[MyLadiesDaddy]

7 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Well, the SCOTUS obviously decided the lower courts and State Supreme Courts handled the situations and didn't need to be adjudicated at the Federal level.  I would understand the upheaval among conservatives if the SCOTUS was liberal heavy, but that is not the case...as it has been hand molded by DJT himself.  

 

GO RV, then BV  

I'm never going to allow you to perpetuate this misdirection without serious pushback. No court has ever seen a single piece of evidence. The only thing any court decided was to refuse to hear the case. 

This has little to do with a Conservative or Liberal opinion and everything to do with gross dereliction of duty. 

 

Furthermore, what you are failing to understand is that because the court's have abdicated their duties they have created the very situation that liberals are most afraid of. They have opened the door for the Military to legally intervene and bring law and order back into the situation. 

This is not hyperbole but fact. 

I have repeatedly told you that by the end of April the world is going to be STUNNED at what happens in America. 

 

The Democratic Communist party has attempted to remove the freedom of America through deception and theft and has committed multiple acts of treason. But as long as the American Judicial system was there to adjudicate justice there was literally no legal means by which the Military could intervene. Now that means has been given and justice is SOON COMING. 

 

And you, as a former Military person, should know that FREEDOM can NEVER be taken by force. 

 

Really, you should forget the party narrative and study more on Military Justice and the Constitution.