Pennsylvania Ping!
Please ping me with articles of interest.
FReepmail me to be added to the list.
Posted on 11/27/2020 9:26:11 PM PST by bitt
This is HUGE!
Pennsylvania Judge Patricia A. McCullough ruled that the Pennsylvania preliminary ELECTION CERTIFICATION injunction was PROPERLY ISSUED and should be upheld.
McCullough added this, “Additionally, petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed.”
Here is a copy of Friday night’s ruling.
https://www.scribd.com/document/486132522/Memorandum-Opinion-Filed-in-Pennsylvania-by-Judge-McCullough-Election-Likely-Unconstitutional#from_embed
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
bookmark
WOO-HOO! GO Sydney!
Ummmm... NO... the judge cannot give the legislature a power they already had!
I’m sure the article’s author just didn’t understand what the judge was saying.
Pennsylvania Ping!
Please ping me with articles of interest.
FReepmail me to be added to the list.
Ping
If a case has no chance whatsoever to succeed, it is generally considered frivolous and is dismissed at the git-go. "Likelihood to succeed" only indicates a non-zero chance of succeeding, i.e that it is not entirely frivolous.
The author of this ruling is the judge. The judge was just extending the order and did admit its a winning case
They! could! go! all! the! WAAAAAAAY!
From reading the ruling, it’s clear that the judge is very well aware that the Dems tried to pull a fast one with trying to certify only President and Vice President before she could rule. I don’t think she’ll let them get away with it.
Why doesn’t any of these sensational stories from GP ever come to fruition. If GP was even close to being true, Trump would have received 100 million votes, 40 states and this election would have already been settled. Does anywhen believe GP or am I just missing out on the joke?
We need some more cowbell here.
I just read the opinion.
I did not see anywhere in there where the judge “gave power” to the legislature directly or implicitly.
If anything, it looks to me like the judge was saying that the legislature could NOT act until after Dec 8.
However, I would disagree with that.
The legislature can take that power back at any time.
Whether or not it would be a good political move or not would remain to be seen.
“Ummmm... NO... the judge cannot give the legislature a power they already had!
I’m sure the article’s author just didn’t understand what the judge was saying.”
Correct, however, the Judge does have the power to issue an injunction or uphold the one previously issued.
Likely this goes back to court on an appeal, and at some point will trigger the state legislature to assert its rights or a SCOTUS intervention.
I agree.
I needed this.’
I just got through reading the 3rd circuit ruling against the Trump. It was brutal. I don’t know why the Trump campaign didn’t allege fraud in that case.
But this is good news. And it sounds like the legislature will act in PA.
If PA acts, then other states may well follow.
GP almost always overstates things, but they are not always wrong in the basic facts, whether their analysis is off the wall or not.
Regardless, the first domino is about to fall!
?????
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.