Posted on 12/04/2020 6:57:16 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The Michigan appeals court turned down an appeal Friday from President Donald Trump's campaign in a challenge to how absentee ballots were handled in Detroit and other issues.
In a brief order, the court said the lawsuit fails because Michigan's election results, including Joe Biden's 154,000-vote victory over Trump, were certified on Nov. 23, a week before the campaign filed an appellate brief.
The court said the president's only recourse was a recount, but that has passed, too.
“Because plaintiff failed to follow the clear law in Michigan relative to such matters, their action is moot,” Judge Stephen Borrello said in a 2-1 order.
Judge Patrick Meter disagreed, saying a three-judge panel should quickly hear the appeal.
“The issues are not moot because state electors have not yet been seated, the Electoral College has not yet been assembled and Congress has not yet convened to consider whether to exercise its powers under” the constitution, Meter said.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
I always felt that PA was heading to SCOTUS. There is a lot of questions on legality with the earlier SCOTUS ruling going to liberals because of that POS Roberts. AZ was lost because of the liberal migration out of CA and really poor candidates. I had thought WI was lost but there may be a case there now with 200,000 fraudulent ballots discovered during the audit. I really do not think the cheaters or the Trump team understood how massive the fraud had to be to overcome Trump's popularity. I believe the Trump team was prepared to fight it out in one state maybe two. But when the dust settled, they had to fight it out in six battle ground states. That is nearly impossible which is what I believe was the real reason those two law firms bailed. I also believe the Trump team knew this, as well. They are really after a legislative cure not a judicial one. That is where Rudy comes in. Trump could flip one state, possibly two but no way you will win the three or four necessary to flip the election in the courts. To fight a fraud so massive it turned this country into a third world country over night...nobody could have prepared for that. The only hope appears to be legislative. I fear there will be a lot of disappointed conservatives. For the RATS it will be a phyrric victory, the fraud will be proven with a lot coming out over the next year. MAYBE a few laws will be changed,NC just won an appeal to their voter ID law. That may pave the way for more states to adopt their standards. As for Biteme he and the HO will face four years of China interference investigations and possibly an impeachment for Biteme after 2022.
What are we left with? A hope and prayer for some mythical SCOTUS ruling that flips three states, or nullifies the entire election and throws it to the Congress. Or three State legislatures taking back the process of selecting electors. Prior to Roberts, Conservatives saw SCOTUS as the adult supervision of the three branches. Under Roberts, SCOTUS seems more like Uncle Buck and less like the adults. If you are counting on Uncle Buck it may be a long wait, at least until 2024. Longer, if Biteme does everything he promises and the anger boils over in to the streets.
“We should have had teams of skilled litigators available, on standby, in each and EVERY contested state.”
Lots of conservatives, even in Trump’s team, thought he would win by a landslide over senile Joe.
If he had won, would he be doing the voting review now?
Yeah, yeah - whatever. They make their decision, then their clerks work backward from the decision.
Been following the "courts" a little longer than you.
As for the rest - lookit you, all "knowing politics n stuff", after your whole six and a half years on FR!
**snicker**
I believe that is the argument in PA. Because of instructions by the Secretary of State and the Governor, rules were created that in the end allowed some counties to cure mail in ballots while other counties did not have the option or voters weren’t given the option to cure mail in ballots that were rejected. The rules were never approved by the Legislatures nor voted on via a referendum. PA already rejected 10,000 ballots but those were never counted to begin with. The argument is unequal treatment under the law and the rules that created the disparity were never approved by legislation.
Wisconsin, is similar, but I believe during the audit, they found far more illegal ballots then Biden’s margin of victory. We will see next week.
That was a fun couple-three weeks here on FR.
I am assuming you are being sarcastic because there is no master plan. The GOP and the RATS both hate Trump. We the People liked Trump, but the political parties and business oligarchs that run this country did not like Trump. That is why they did nothing to prevent this fraud.
No matter how successful he made the economy or how much they earned, no matter the long coattails, the GOP does not like Trump and will be glad to see the back side of him heading out the door. The GOP want him gone just as much as the RATS. Then like good little conservative slaves we will return to the plantation and vote for Jeb or some other Globalist GOP excrement.
The GOP want the GA senate seats, but are glad to see Trump fail and be humiliated. At least in their eyes. They had the master plan to get rid of Trump. Trump needs to get revenge on his way out the door and form his own MAGA shadow government. Obama did that so should Trump.
Correct, and I think the obvious disparate treatment of voters who voted in person versus those who voted by mail, with vastly different deadlines and security measures, has created an obvious equal protection issue. I would also think that there must be serious civil rights questions when voters who voted properly and in good faith can have their votes diluted or canceled by either illegal votes or fraud. Of course, fraud must be proven, but there is abundant evidence in every state of large numbers of illegal votes, beyond the margin of victory.
If the dead, non-citizens, non-residents, or the unverifiable are permitted to vote, then the right to vote no longer has any meaning. The right to ensure that one’s vote is not disenfranchised by error or illegal voting is every bit as essential as ensuring access to the vote.
If those aren’t federal issues then nothing is.
Don’t hear no fat lady yet!
I think you're wrong because the so-called msm shut out the entire hearing - it was only on conservative outlets. Not many people other than that saw it.
So is being “certified” now the equivalent of “no backsies”?
So, a lot to unpack here
1- In Bush v Gore, SCOUTS identified very specific ways in which the Florida Supremes were violating equal protection. The Florida Supreme Court decision did not specify who in each precinct will review the ballots, and how the various degrees of ballot marks (dimpled chad, double hanging chad, triple hanging chad, etc.) will be interpreted. Each precinct was applying its own methodology. This was very clearly a disparate treatment.
However, just because the legislature gave voters different options for voting does not create disparate treatment. Otherwise, when government gives you the option to pay property taxes by check or credit card, a disparate treatment claim arises. Anyway, that argument has never been raised in trial courts, and therefore is not up for appellate review.
2- In Bush v Gore, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas wrote another separate opinion. This was not a majority opinion, but it has persuasive effect. In this opinion, these justices emphasized that Federal government gives great deference to the state legislature’s decisions in picking electors. But when, AFTER an election, a state Supreme Court start legislating the minutiae of counting votes, (even if no disparate impact) this creates a constitutional issue. Why? Because the states would not be acting as Republics. In a Republic, courts don’t legislate the minutiae of counting votes.
The problem is: (1) this is not a binding opinion, and (2) here, the state courts are not legislating the minutiae of counting votes. They are not making new rules on interpreting chads, etc. They are mostly applying rules that existed BEFORE the election.
The PA case is close, but for a different reason. The PA Supreme Court ruled, BEFORE the election, that a cure of defective ballots is NOT prohibited. After that, the PA secretary of state, acting under duty delegated to it by the legislature, gave each precinct discretion in allowing ballot cures.
Now, Dershowitz thinks this is disparate treatment. I agree, but that is a different issue of law. Look again at the Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas opinion. They don’t talk about disparate treatment violating the “equal protection” clause. They talk about legislating from the bench violating the “Republican government” clause.
So … in conclusion: I don’t think a “Republican government” challenge exists in most (if any) of these State Supreme Court losses.
But there may be a “disparate treatment” challenge as to the PA ballots that were subject to cure. But I was told that those ballots are not enough to flip PA.
So I just don’t see a high likelihood of many of these failed state Supreme Court cases making it to SCOTUS. Remember, you don’t have a RIGHT to have your case heard by SCOTUS. Only about 5% of cases applying for SCOTUS review get to be reviewed. And the SCOTUS has already declined to review one defeat in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Again, let’s wait and see.
I agree that the GOP hates DJT. When he started running, they laughed and scoffed at him. There is plenty of footage of Graham, McConnell, Romney, even Cruz knocking DJT. And I’m not just talking about criticizing his policies. I am talking about outright contempt and ridicule.
If DJT was expecting a landslide victory, he was misinformed. His advisors should have told him that he had ruffled too many feathers. The Rats, of course. And the RINOs, and the party-apathetic deep state, and the Never Trumpers.
Personally, I wanted to see the two RINOs in GA senate runoff go down in defeat. But lots and lots of people on FR called me nasty names … and then, when DJT himself came out in support of them, I thought “ok … he knows a lot more than I do.”
Also, and to be blunt, I am reading a lot of court opinions and carefully reviewing a lot of the evidence, and I am beginning to think that some of these cases are weak in substance, not just in procedure. I don’t want to go into detail now, because I don’t want to share with every Tom, Dick, and Harry, my opinion as to the weakness of these cases … at least not until the issue has been resolved.
Sorry about the long and rambling post.
In a brief order, the court said the lawsuit fails because Michigan’s election results, including Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory over Trump, were certified on Nov. 23, a week before the campaign filed an appellate brief.
The court said the president’s only recourse was a recount, but that has passed, too.
The state of Florida certified it’s results in 2000 election, and the court cases kept going on and on like it never happened. In fact, Gore kept winning them all.
Spent his time in court saying “we’re not alleging fraud”
The Florida Supreme Court had ordered a recount, but ballots were being judged differently by different counties.
The PA Supreme Court ruled, BEFORE the election, that a cure of defective ballots is NOT prohibited.
I think Rudy’s obvious discomfort under hot lights was part of someone’s dirty tricks, making him sweat and have to look as if he’s under pressure under grilling answering the questions. . . Third-degree type "sweating" of a guilty criminally.
Think about it. It disturbed me at the time and I was concerned if Rudy were ill, or not.
Modern photo/video flood lights these days are all LED based and do not produce infrared heat lamp effect like the high-intensity video lights of the past once did. They’re cool light, especially at a distance. They’ve been that way for years. Even studio lighting has been long swapped out, retro-fitted, even in old fixtures with modern high lumen LED lights. Why was Giuliani sweating up a storm under those lights unless someone deliberately brought in old style incandescent klieg lights to make him hot?
Trump was always deliberately videoed by main stream news crews using an orange filter, which editors would further enhance. This was deliberate. It was part of their intent to make Trump appear buffoonish, as a clown, who had no business running for president. Occasionally, in group shots, they’d forget to do their enhancements, and Trump would appear normal, same skin tones as others in the group. . . But those are rare. It was a true conspiracy of dunces. They created "orange man bad" trope.
This sweating, not believable, under pressure Rudy, is more of the same. Psychological warfare.
If you had filed suit against them before the crime you would have recourse
___________________________
Standing has been denied hen the suit is brought prior to a known injury.
“They are cheating” is not admissible.
Whats the big deal about IQs? They don’t measure common sense, and thats more important than trying to figure out that a square peg won’t fit in a round hole, unless the square peg is a democrat and then anything goes.
BTW, my IQ measured twice as 144, which is pretty good I guess. But so what! My vote is still counteracted by someone with an IQ of 70, and probably dead too.
...an attorney with decades of experience, and over a decade of hard-core experience in Fed Court. I take one or two cases to trial every year, and argue 3-4 motions every month.
_________________________
With that in mind, is there a legal, constitutional path through the courts to deal with this obvious and massive, coordinated election fraud/theft?
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.