Opposition to bill of complaint. MI,WI,PA,GA respond

You'd think that out of 50+ lawsuits, Team Trump would have provided evidence? So, either one of the two things or both, are true:
1. Team Trump are utterly incompetent. 2. There is no evidence. If #2 is true, and it is true, your point is moot. If #1 is true, how is it possible that the most powerful man in the world is picking incompetent lawyers to represent him? Unless, of course, the president is incompetent, and if that is the case, and it IS the case, then Trump is the last person on earth who deserves to be president.

 

Exactly.

No competent lawyer will touch this Frivolous BS.

Trump's "Legal Team" (Rudy, Et.Al) is a Who's Who of Discredited Tinfoil Hat Whackjobs.

The MORON (Eastman) who filed the suit in Texas put a Blatant LIE in his pleadings (repeated by Trump on Twitter) that completely removed any chance of this "filing" (always destined to fail, in any event) from being taken seriously.

 

...which is an alternative expression for "ok, Trump lost and we supporters are screwed but how about you on the left just quietly leave us to lick our wounds and whimper now".

 

Of the 50 individual state lawsuits, you'd think Team Trump would have won a few of those lawsuits, but the lost all of them, save one, which was for something minor. But, the real truth is none of the 'irregularities' (common to all national elections) that were proffered were sufficient to change the outcome in each of those states. So, your point is moot

 

Some, like Minneapolis are trying.

Packed? They were nominated and confirmed by the Senate. You just don't like them. It happens to all of us at one time or another.

That doesn't excuse anything. They can't be allowed to do that.

What percentage of "Trumpsters" threaten people with guns? Do you have any idea? Or do you like to paint large segments of the population with your "truth?"

 

Unfortunately they aren't simply licking their wounds. They are trying to overturn a Democratic election with deceit and advocating for civil war.

 

You think it didn't rise to the point a affecting the outcome but you don't know. Neither do I nor does anyone else. There is enough noise about it, though, that deserves an investigation.

 

What deceit and what civil war?

 

"TDS" (and similar constructs) is an artificial construct, a thought terminating cliché, a non argument, a device constructed by Trumpsters to compensate for their inability to provide a counter argument of substance, and as such, is incompetent as a counter argument.

Incompetent rebuttals are arguments where the salient premise is based on: [highlighted pertains to your comment]
non arguments, a non argument isn't really debatable or they are not worthy of debate owing to any of the following types noting the fact they all have one thing in common--they lack sufficient dignity worthy of a response, they come in many different flavors, especially those which contain vacuous declarations and/or allegations (which cannot be substantiated, i.e., 'making stuff up'), rebuttals rife with weasel words ( improper use of generalities such as 'some people are saying' 'everyone knows' 'well-established fact'.) ad hominems, loaded terms & phrases,, off topic/irrelevant deflections, sentiments (words that reveal emotional attitude devoid of fact, logic and reason) red baiting ( everyone on the left are communists, commies, etc) off point arguments/deflections (off point is a sibling to off topic, where off topic is attempting to highjack the thread. It's done a lot in internet forums, and if the person to whom you directed the topic change accepts it, then you're off into a new direction, but, as such, of course, doesn't refute the original premise offered), egregious strawman arguments, egregious cynicism, off-the-charts ill-logic, 'kill the messenger" tactics, i.e., attacking the person presenting the argument rather than the argument, itself ( the only time kill the messenger is valid is for a well-established discredited source, such as Alex Jones, David Duke, etc, ), childish remarks, trivialising your opponent's argument -- cheap shot, childish or sophomoric comments/logic arising from ignorance (for example, NYTimes is a 'radical leftist rag' -- that's a remark born out of ignorance, it's also an 'kill the messenger' tactic) and then there is the classic thought-terminating cliché; these are cult-tropes, born out of groups who have a demagogue leader who is the master of implanting them in his flock. See, the demagogue doesn't like dissent, so when anyone challenges someone in his flock, Trump, being a master mind manipulator, will have planted a number of thought-terminating clichés into the minds of his subjects ( via repetition) so they will toss it up to the opponent in an attempt to kill the conversation ( wrongfully thinking it improves their argument ) so TTCs are simple terms catch phrases or words whose sole purpose is, to kill the conversation, AND preventing his flock to think for themselves, terms such as 'TDS' "NeverTrumper" "Leftist Loony" (noting that the terms are not necessarily devised by the demagogue himself, they could be created by other believers, or have already been around and adopted by and they catch on with the group ) etc., pithy aphorisms assumed to be always true ( aphorisms exist because empirical observations tend to be true, but cannot be used as the salient premise to refute an argument as they are not, nor cannot be, absolute), last, but not least, and a significant debate sin, is posturing; posturing type comments, come in two basic categories, one is where you flaunt, i.e, for example, your military service, but of course if the argument can be improved by your qualifications of expertise in a field, that is okay, what I mean is something like 'I served while you were dodging the draft" whereupon your service doesn't improve your argument about whether dodging the draft was moral, or not, or flaunting your education, or authority of some kind, unless it's pertinent to the argument, and the other type of posturing are those comments which are motivated by puffing oneself up, and this is done by shaming, belittling, mocking, patronizing, 'mansplaining', flaming, where one talks down to ones opponent in order to puff oneself up.

 

Clearly the Democrats committed Fraud, but this lawsuit is more about states not following the Constitution.

 

"Clearly."

LOL.

 

If it were "clearly" so you guys would be winning lawsuits over it. There's a reason you switched to a different argument. The fact that you guys didn't bother bringing this to court until after the election isn't promising for your case.

 

False comparison, and false premise, to wit.

1. No one is 'shutting down the country'
2. Votes don't kill.

 

Nearly every liberal on the planet is obsessed with Donald Trump. That is Trump Derangement Syndrome. Blaming him for individual failure is weak at best.

 

I fully recognize those four other states picked a loser! That is what Texas is trying to help them rectify! Sounds like you are almost on board.

 

You don't understand the law. This is the ONLY time this suit is valid, right after the election and before the certification, per law professor Jonathan Turley. Turley did say it's a long shot, because courts are quite passive most of the time, including the SCOTUS.

 

Thank you for proving my point!

 

There is NOT enough time left before the 14th.

This suit is (and was always) DOA.

 

What was this "Trump Derangement Syndrome" that you refer to?

Please elaborate.

In any event, back on topic, this "filing" has ZERO Chance of altering the results.

Biden Won/TRUMP LOST. It is Over. Period.

 

Barely? 7M more total votes. Remember trump lost by 3M popular votes in 2016.

tRUMP got 306 EC votes.
Biden will get 306 EC votes. The exact same amount. That's hardly barely. tRUMP called it a landslide victory 4 yrs ago.

 

Trump is still definitely going to call them RINOs or whatever, and his supporters will still call them part of the deep state or something equally ridiculous.

 

In reality, the republicans in those states should stop being republicans. They are complete imbecile incompetents letting the Dems change laws right under their noses and they did nothing. Hell, the dems did it in R controlled Ga and Az.

Each state has both parties on election committees and those incompetent republicans couldn't do nothing about the rules.
They were challenged at the state level and still the incompetent republicans could do nothing.

 

That is not the point. The point is that a 6/3 court is the real packed court, as that court does not reflect the will of the people, if reflects republicans who know they only way they can win is by packing the court radically in their favor.

"Truth?", that's rich considering the right calls democrats 'communists' and 'venezuela socialists' and declares Antifa are sponsored an endorsed by democrats with funding from Soros, are 'radical left wing extremists who are going to take away your guns, take away your religion, and take away your freedom' blah blah blah,and assorted lies a daily basis.

Don't lecture this forum about 'truth'.

 

Explain "TDS".

What are you actually trying to convey by using that term?

In any event, back on topic, I do agree that The Court will do nothing to change the results.