Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: LAWMAKERS HIT STEIN WITH HORRIBLE NEWS… MOVE TO CONFISCATE RECOUNT WAR CHEST
Next News Network ^ | 12/8/16 | Next News Network

Posted on 12/09/2016 7:22:15 AM PST by TangoLimaSierra

YouTube


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2016recount; election; fakenews; fundingtheleft; hernecklookslikemy; jillstein; michigan; nutcase; recount; stein; warchest; youryoutubesucks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-168 next last
To: xzins
-- Would that suggest that I, too, could go to the 6th asking for a recount to insure integrity? --

Assuming you had gone through the same moves she did to set it up (petition election board, petition federal court, lose in both of those places), yes. She has argued that a person who cannot be made the winner via a court proceeding has a right to recount, because a recount is essential to insure the outcome was correct.

Even initally-friendly Judge Conehead in the ED of MI figured out that her argument is loopy.

121 posted on 12/09/2016 9:03:02 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
The lower courts and appellate courts have humored her (and a couple of partisan courts even gave her what she asked for), but at this point, even her partisan compatriots have told her she's lost.

That's what I've understood you to be saying, with the caveat that she 'could' keep going if she was of a mind to do so.

If she's got a screw loose, then she'll do just that. (And I'm not sure she doesn't have a screw loose.)

122 posted on 12/09/2016 9:03:03 AM PST by xzins (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

If she steps of an airplane anywhere in the state of Michigan she should be pummeled with thousands of floppy disks and anything ‘floppy’ left lying about.


123 posted on 12/09/2016 9:04:27 AM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies ('45 will be the best ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
The Lautenberg Amendment was upheld by SCOTUS

I recall. I was livid that thanks to a gutless legislature and a tyrannical judiciary another very important part of the Constitution has been gutted.

The prohibition of ex post facto laws was very important to our founders because they had seen first hand the evil they represent.

124 posted on 12/09/2016 9:05:48 AM PST by ChildOfThe60s ("If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

I can see no reason for a recount other than to settle a close contest.

Some kind of state review of an election should be a regular order of business in any state to determine if their system is working correctly. Maybe every 4 or 5 years.

But I cannot see a disgruntled candidate being able to initiate that process.


125 posted on 12/09/2016 9:07:39 AM PST by xzins (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

LOL, that sounds somewhat threatening!


126 posted on 12/09/2016 9:08:38 AM PST by rlmorel (Orwell described Liberals when he wrote of those who "repudiate morality while laying claim to it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Yes, she can keep going, but the courts are going to tell her she's done.

CJ Young on the MI SC has telegraphed that he is no mood to let the federal courts walk on his state's law, and while judges relish dealing with controversy, not so much when they are the ones causing it. MI courts handled this case very well, and after being burned already (in this case, by Goldsmith), the federal courts aren't going to jump into the fire. If they say anything, it will be to blister her even more.

127 posted on 12/09/2016 9:08:51 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: i_robot73; Alberta's Child

I’ve read a number of court decisions. Makes me a geek, and I’m not a lawyer. But I’ve read a LOT of excellent, carefully thought out and clear court decisions. Many judges are excellent.

Some decide what they want the outcome to be, and vote accordingly. 5 members of the US Supreme Court are like that.

There used to be a guy on the Arizona Supreme Court. He would make (with help) a decision based on what he wanted. The next year, the AZ Legislature would pass a law specifically overturning his decision. It went on for years. The court would say, “X means Y”. The Legislature would pass a law the next year, defining X as X in extreme detail. In many cases, they would outlaw what the court had just ruled legal.

But there are many good judges, and I’ve met a number of good lawyers.


128 posted on 12/09/2016 9:10:18 AM PST by Mr Rogers (We're a nation of infants, ruled by their emotion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: xzins
-- I can see no reason for a recount other than to settle a close contest. --

There is no reason, with a little caveat. Courts will look at wider margin cases when fraud is alleged to be involved. Even then, if the fraud isn;t big enough to reverse the outcome, recounting is pointless.

The point of a recount is to make sure the first count was "correct enough" to result in the right candidate being declared winner. There are several other tools in the election process to validate the way the contest was played.

129 posted on 12/09/2016 9:14:05 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Thanks, P-Marlowe.

After reviewing this in more detail based on comments posted on this thread, my understanding is that the punitive aspect of a law may define whether it's truly considered an "ex-post facto law" under constitutional terms. And the best description I've seen along those lines is this: A law or order is not punitive if its scope is limited to the compensation of harm suffered.

I look forward to FR lawyers weighing in on this one.

130 posted on 12/09/2016 9:21:07 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Yo, bartender -- Jobu needs a refill!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media

Make that NAZI activist criminal. He was a member of the NAZI party during WW II in which his role was in Seizing Jewish property.


131 posted on 12/09/2016 9:23:41 AM PST by dglang
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: xzins
George Soros has become the FreeRepublic version of the Koch brothers ...

You know, the elusive guy with a lot of money who is financing everything the political opposition is engaged in -- whether there is any evidence for this financial backing or not.

132 posted on 12/09/2016 9:24:20 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Yo, bartender -- Jobu needs a refill!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: dglang

Soros is a war criminal and pure evil

Soros needs to be arrested.


133 posted on 12/09/2016 9:25:03 AM PST by Democrat_media (bot funded Jill Stein's recount website.12 million $ from Soros behind big scheme)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: dglang

Although it’s important to remember that from Marx came both communism and Nazism, among other vile and foolish ventures.


134 posted on 12/09/2016 9:28:22 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

It sounds like it’s dead, but it will be moot shortly....Dec 19?


135 posted on 12/09/2016 9:33:26 AM PST by xzins (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I agree, but the Justices caved.


136 posted on 12/09/2016 9:33:46 AM PST by Engedi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I’ve noticed that as a pastor over the years. Some people are more in awe of Satan’s evil than they are of God’s power.

Always surprises me.


137 posted on 12/09/2016 9:36:30 AM PST by xzins (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Democrat_media

I fully agree with you and I never said otherwise.


138 posted on 12/09/2016 9:36:35 AM PST by dglang
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Engedi

Those justices recused themselves anyway. They weren’t sufficiently impressed with my opinion. :>)


139 posted on 12/09/2016 9:37:57 AM PST by xzins (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: xzins

You will be happy to know that since the case of Calder v. Bull in 1797, the prohibition against ex post facto laws only applies to criminal prosecution, not civil claims.


140 posted on 12/09/2016 9:39:07 AM PST by henkster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-168 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson