USA Politics
- Thread starter Genghis Khan
- Start date
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
With Trump's last move now being to try convincing Republican state congress members to order the state's electors to vote for Trump based on the same bullshit that the courts are turning down on a daily basis - how come there aren't more GOP politicians who tell him that "Mr President, that's just not how we do it in the United States"
What explains this cowardice? OK, Trump's a moron, but the lack of people with the guts to tell him in public that he's wrong ... sickening. Are there only a handful of Republican politicians who still have balls? Have they all sacrificed theirs to Trump?
What explains this cowardice? OK, Trump's a moron, but the lack of people with the guts to tell him in public that he's wrong ... sickening. Are there only a handful of Republican politicians who still have balls? Have they all sacrificed theirs to Trump?
Jer
A window to the west, a blazing star above
A complete lack of character combined with oversized political ambition. People who still call themselves Republicans these days have basically abandoned core American principles and only care about the accumulation and retention of power.
Black Abyss Babe
I live for my dreams and a pocket full of gold
I don't think he is - that's what makes it so frightening. He's absolutely not stupid, he really is this nasty, narcissist, vain and arrogant (always assuming he is actually sane). If there is any legally possible tactic or loophole which might allow him to cling on to power then I don't think he will care if it's immoral and against every principle America has: he will try it.
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
I'm not implying he doesn't know what he's doing., or at least I don't mean to imply it.
Perhaps I should've stated he's acting like a moron.
Perhaps I should've stated he's acting like a moron.
Black Abyss Babe
I live for my dreams and a pocket full of gold
Yax
Ancient Mariner
Happy reading.
www.theatlantic.com
The Next Decade Could Be Even Worse
A historian believes he has discovered iron laws that predict the rise and fall of societies. He has bad news.
www.theatlantic.com
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Georgia has ratified the election result after a recount, does this mean the deadline for the campaigns to request another recount has passed? Or can the Trumpeones still request it? (I know rhey could request it after the initial count, due to the narrow margin).
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
I guess that's what Trump is (pretending to be) trying in Michigan as well. I just wonder why they're doing that in Michigan, which is not the most closely contested state? Is it just a petty attempt to get back at the Democrat governor after she (rightly, in my opinion) blamed Trump's rhetorics for the kidnap plot against her? Or is it because the GOP has the majority in the state legislature, so that Trump's attempt to turn it at least will have some credibility in the eyes of the most hardcore fans?
jazz from hell
Ancient Mariner
It doesn‘t have to be this way. In times like these, you can really see where someone stands, who stands up for freedom, peace and democracy, and who doesn’t...Happy reading.
The Next Decade Could Be Even Worse
A historian believes he has discovered iron laws that predict the rise and fall of societies. He has bad news.
D
Deleted member 7164
Guest
WTF Happened In 1971?
"I don't believe we shall ever have a good money again before we take the thing out of the hands of government, that is, we can't take it violently out of the hands of government, all we can do is by some sly roundabout way introduce something that they can't stop." - F.A. Hayek 1984
wtfhappenedin1971.com
And they wonder why people become communists.
Black Abyss Babe
I live for my dreams and a pocket full of gold
Does anyone know why Trump is so keen to get to the Supreme Court? I mean, to get his fatuous claims looked at again after the lower courts have thrown them out, wouldn't he need to produce significant new evidence, and be able to demonstrate that is was actually new? And if it was known that he had that evidence before and deliberately hadn't presented it, wouldn't that harm his case? Also how does contempt of court work in America?
It seems to me that Trump is playing a very strange game but I don't really understand how the American legal system works - anyone who does, your insight would be very much appreciated here. Thanks!
It seems to me that Trump is playing a very strange game but I don't really understand how the American legal system works - anyone who does, your insight would be very much appreciated here. Thanks!
So basically, the thinking is the SCOTUS, divided by ideology, would vote to secure a Trump presidency over a Biden presidency. You can appeal dismissals but generally the higher courts just go, nah. That's what's happening here. There's no lawsuits gaining any traction that would impact the outcome of the election.
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Perhaps he thinks that this works just like his shady business. He has appointed three of the nine judges in the Supreme Court, so they should be loyal to him. Quid pro quo and all that ...
I suspect that for the Supreme Court to actually give any of the cases an actual court treatment, rather than just dismissing it after receiving the filed lawsuit, there needs to be something new, backed by actual evidence. And in that case I suspect the Supreme Court would first order that the case be sent back to a lower court? If there is nothing new compared to the lawsuits filed to (and dismissed by) lower courts, the Supreme Court won't be interested either. After all, the role of the Supreme Court in most countries is to judge whether rulings by lower courts are in accordance with the law (i.e. assure correct application of the law) and especially to hold those rulings up against the Constitution.
Of course the Supreme Court won't waste their time on hearsay dismissed by lower courts.
I suspect that for the Supreme Court to actually give any of the cases an actual court treatment, rather than just dismissing it after receiving the filed lawsuit, there needs to be something new, backed by actual evidence. And in that case I suspect the Supreme Court would first order that the case be sent back to a lower court? If there is nothing new compared to the lawsuits filed to (and dismissed by) lower courts, the Supreme Court won't be interested either. After all, the role of the Supreme Court in most countries is to judge whether rulings by lower courts are in accordance with the law (i.e. assure correct application of the law) and especially to hold those rulings up against the Constitution.
Of course the Supreme Court won't waste their time on hearsay dismissed by lower courts.
So the assumption is that if SCOTUS choose to take up a case, they would ultimately vote in Trump’s favor. The court has to vote to even hear a case and tends only to do so if there’s a possibility of overturning a previous court’s decision. The Supreme Court has been notably silent for the most part during this process and seems to be sending a clear signal that they don’t want anything to do with these cases.
Trump is definitely of the mindset that his appointed judges will rule in his favor as a sort of quid pro quo. He said as much during the confirmation for ACB. He has repeatedly shown that he doesn’t know how to the court system works and this is another example. Republicans continue to go along with this for political reasons and expect the courts to ultimately operate the way they have been.
There is absolutely a scenario where SCOTUS hands Trump a victory, but it’s one where he’s down by 500 votes in one key state. The problem for Trump is that he is down by 10s of thousands of votes in multiple key states, and many of these states are to the point of certifying their results. Just having one state overturn their results is a monumental task (has that even happened before?), let alone 2 or 3. This election was closer than we thought, but still not particularly close.
Trump is definitely of the mindset that his appointed judges will rule in his favor as a sort of quid pro quo. He said as much during the confirmation for ACB. He has repeatedly shown that he doesn’t know how to the court system works and this is another example. Republicans continue to go along with this for political reasons and expect the courts to ultimately operate the way they have been.
There is absolutely a scenario where SCOTUS hands Trump a victory, but it’s one where he’s down by 500 votes in one key state. The problem for Trump is that he is down by 10s of thousands of votes in multiple key states, and many of these states are to the point of certifying their results. Just having one state overturn their results is a monumental task (has that even happened before?), let alone 2 or 3. This election was closer than we thought, but still not particularly close.