U.S. Electile Dementia paralytica 2020

[Nick]

You can attach a hyperlink to an image instead of to a piece of text.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Conservative group alleging voter fraud ends its lawsuits

HOUSTON (AP) — A conservative group on Monday moved to dismiss voter fraud lawsuits it had filed in four states days after the group's leader made baseless allegations questioning the integrity of the election.

Lawyers for True the Vote filed notices to dismiss cases in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania less than a week after suing in all four states. Jim Bopp Jr., an attorney for the group, declined to say why they were ending their lawsuits, but confirmed there were no other cases pending from the group.
<snip>

I think the reason is something like this: "WHAT?? Courts of law require evidence? Oh. Never mind...."

[kladner]

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...theyre-blaming

Corporate Democrats got the presidential nominee they wanted, along with control over huge campaign ad budgets and nationwide messaging to implement "moderate" strategies. But, as the Washington Post noted, Joe Biden's victory "came with no coattails down ballot." Democratic losses left just a razor-thin cushion in the House, and the party failed to win a Senate majority. Now, corporate Democrats are scapegoating progressives.

The best members of Congress are pushing back—none more forcefully or eloquently than Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan who just won her second term in one of the nation's poorest districts. She was the most outspoken against an anti-progressive pile-on during a Nov. 5 conference call of House Democrats. And she continues to hold high a shining lantern of progressive principles.

Tlaib has pointed out that "Democratic candidates in swing districts who openly supported progressive policies, like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, won their races." And she refuses to retreat.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Trump campaign lawsuit over Pennsylvania vote heads to court (my emphasis)

A hearing on the Trump campaign's federal lawsuit seeking to prevent Pennsylvania officials from certifying the vote results remains on track for Tuesday after a judge quickly denied the campaign's new lawyer's request for a delay.

U.S. Middle District Judge Matthew Brann told lawyers for Donald J. Trump for President Inc. and the counties and state election official it has sued that they must show up and "be prepared for argument and questioning" at the Williamsport federal courthouse.

The Trump campaign wants to prevent certification of results that give President-elect Joe Biden the state"s 20 electoral votes, suing over election procedures that were not uniform across the state.

Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar has asked to have the lawsuit thrown out, calling its allegations in court filings "at best, garden-variety irregularities."

Brann scheduled the hearing to discuss the campaign’s request for a temporary restraining order as well as the defendants’ request to have the case dismissed.

After Pittsburgh lawyers dropped out of representing Trump's campaign on Friday, Philadelphia election lawyer Linda Kerns and two Texas lawyers also withdrew Monday.

Camp Hill lawyer Mark Scaringi, a losing candidate in the 2012 Republican U.S. Senate primary, notified the judge he was stepping in, but did not get the delay he sought.
<snip>

I'm no legal expert, but when the lawyers representing you stampede for the exits, that probably does not bode well for your case. So then a new lawyer shows up, and moves for a delay. Nice try, but Motion Denied.

EDIT: This is even better than I thought. Since it seems natural for new counsel just entering a case to require some time to prepare, it occurred to me to wonder why the request for a delay by the new counsel in this case was slapped down so quickly. So I did some digging.

And in the MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT of the MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE filed by Linda A. Kerns, John Scott, and Douglas Bryan Hughes, what to my wondering eyes should appear but

Marc A. Scaringi is aware of the schedule set by the Court in this matter and will be prepared to proceed according to that schedule.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by kladner

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2...theyre-blaming

I offer the following cautionary note: Yes, US Reps running on a progressive policy agenda won their races, but they and their agendas were used by the Republicans to bludgeon candidates in other races. And they think this worked, and intend to use this tactic again. The Common Dreams article has a link to a WAPO news article, which has the following assessment by an R-campaigner:

Republicans, meanwhile, are already telegraphing a repeat of the election platform that worked down ballot this year, including a disproportionate focus on high-profile liberal stars such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

"It's very clear that AOC could care less about what Joe Biden thinks or wants," Republican congressional campaign consultant Corry Bliss said. "And after Democrats spend two years trying to defund the police and pass the Green New Deal, the midterms are going to remind us of the glory of 2010."

AFAIK the Democratic US Senate candidates who fell far short of unseating "vulnerable" incumbent Republicans were not running as "progressives." If the R's were able to pin the "socialist" label on them anyway, it begs the question of why this tactic was successful. This, in turn, raises the question of what the losing candidates were offering as a constructive alternative to the incumbents. My guess is, "Not much."

[rogue]

I'm curious to know how the Trumpsters are viewing the lack of evidence for massive voter fraud. I assume the thinking is along one or more of these lines.

• They accept that massive voter fraud is "fake news".
• We need more time to find it so block states from certifying their results.
• Massive fraud has happened and the courts should accept that. The courts should make the states prove that it hasn't.
• It is real, but there is a massive cover-up (or nobody is cooperating with our investigation).
• Although not enough to change the outcome, we still need to make it harder for people to vote to prevent fraud in the future.

Making it harder includes:

• Only accept a current and valid driver's license or gun license. Nothing else can be accepted for id.
• Further restrict mail-in voting to require extraordinary circumstances.
• Require a notary for mail-in ballots along with multiple witnesses.
• Require matching signatures.
• Have only a single drop-box in each county with limited days and hours of availability.

Oh wait, they have already done much of list, at least in some states. If it worked in those states, I'm sure it will spread to others.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by rogue

I'm curious to know how the Trumpsters are viewing the lack of evidence for massive voter fraud. I assume the thinking is along one or more of these lines.

• They accept that massive voter fraud is "fake news".
• We need more time to find it so block states from certifying their results.
• Massive fraud has happened and the courts should accept that. The courts should make the states prove that it hasn't.
• It is real, but there is a massive cover-up (or nobody is cooperating with our investigation).
• Although not enough to change the outcome, we still need to make it harder for people to vote to prevent fraud in the future.

<snip>

I believe they've been ballyhooing

• It is real, but there is a massive cover-up (or nobody is cooperating with our investigation).

In view of the fact that WH Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany reported over a million marchers were at the recent DC demonstrations that had maybe 10,000 (even the Ministry of Propaganda Faux News only ventured "tens of thousands"), I submit that perhaps the incumbent's supporters think he won the election because they can't count.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by rogue

I'm curious to know how the Trumpsters are viewing the lack of evidence for massive voter fraud. I assume the thinking is along one or more of these lines.

• They accept that massive voter fraud is "fake news".
• We need more time to find it so block states from certifying their results.
• Massive fraud has happened and the courts should accept that. The courts should make the states prove that it hasn't.
• It is real, but there is a massive cover-up (or nobody is cooperating with our investigation).
• Although not enough to change the outcome, we still need to make it harder for people to vote to prevent fraud in the future.

Making it harder includes:

• Only accept a current and valid driver's license or gun license. Nothing else can be accepted for id.
• Further restrict mail-in voting to require extraordinary circumstances.
• Require a notary for mail-in ballots along with multiple witnesses.
• Require matching signatures.
• Have only a single drop-box in each county with limited days and hours of availability.

Oh wait, they have already done much of list, at least in some states. If it worked in those states, I'm sure it will spread to others.

[storm5510]

I just read a short article about The Imperious Leader looking at options for a nuclear strike on Iran recently. His minions were able to "dissuade" him, so it said.

What a can-of-worms that would have been. If I'm not mistaken, the prevailing winds in The Northern Hemisphere travel southwest to northeast. Fallout would have reached the eastern portions of The Russian Republic. That would be the big iron turd in the punch-bowl. He would have done this without consulting with members of The NATO Alliance. I imagine it would have left Europe in turmoil.

My first thought was, would the U.S. Military blindly follow an order from someone who is clearly mentally-disturbed and unstable? I hope they would not. Perhaps there is a protocol for them to follow in such a case.

It would seem he is going to try to wreck this country in some way before January 20. If he cannot have it, then no one else can either.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by storm5510

I just read a short article about The Imperious Leader looking at options for a nuclear strike on Iran recently. His minions were able to "dissuade" him, so it said.
<snip>

It seems that what he actually wanted was not options for a "nuclear strike," but options for a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, particularly the facility at Natanz. This was apparently in response to the IAEA report on what Iran has been doing WRT busting the 2015 nuclear accord.

He was advised that such an act would probably lead to a war that would not end well for either Iran or the US, and possibly to a region-wide war. Iran has already threatened a "crushing response" to any US military strike.

It would seem he is going to try to wreck this country in some way before January 20. If he cannot have it, then no one else can either.

IMO he's been working tirelessly to wreck the country, and its standing in the world, for his entire Admin. But yes, now that he knows he's been booted out, he could go completely apest.

Perhaps he will try to order a nuclear strike on Detroit, MI; and, if his minions' efforts to stall certification in Maricopa County AZ fail, Flagstaff and Tucson as well. Maybe he'll burn down the White House on his way out.

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

It seems that what he actually wanted was not options for a "nuclear strike," but options for a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, particularly the facility at Natanz. This was apparently in response to the IAEA report on what Iran has been doing WRT busting the 2015 nuclear accord.

He was advised that such an act would probably lead to a war that would not end well for either Iran or the US, and possibly to a region-wide war. Iran has already threatened a "crushing response" to any US military strike.IMO he's been working tirelessly to wreck the country, and its standing in the world, for his entire Admin. But yes, now that he knows he's been booted out, he could go completely apes...

A friend on another site said the same.

Iran's neighbors in the region would suffer the consequences. Personally, I question if they have what they claim to have, as with North Korea. Israel would not tolerate any BS from them, period.

Trump going wacko worries me. It should worry everybody. He should be "relieved" of his position which would allow Pence to finish the term. I don't know if there is anything in The Constitution about this, or not. If not, then it should be added.