Posted on 11/21/2020 6:03:31 PM PST by blueplum
“Scaringi filed a request to delay the hearing, noting its complexity, his status as new to the case and recent turnover in the Trump legal team.
“Having only been retained today, Plaintiffs’ new counsel need additional time to adequately prepare this case for the upcoming oral argument and evidentiary hearing,” Scaringi wrote in a court filing.
“...“Furthermore, this is a case of significant complexity and importance to the people of the United States of America,” he said. “And, further, the court record compiled in such a short period of time already contains 148 docket entries by Plaintiffs, multiple Defendants and multiple Intervenor Defendants.”
The judge refused to give Trump’s new counsel time to further prepare, sending what many would consider to be an outrageous and partisan message to the attorney, the president and the country.
Despite the fact that the case could determine who serves as America’s president, and one side has been amassing its argument for two weeks while the other is barely 24 hours into his role, Brann rejected the request.
“Oral argument will take place as scheduled, tomorrow, November 17, 2020,” the judge wrote. “Counsel for the parties are expected to be prepared for argument and questioning...."
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournal.com ...
“The Judge isn’t a Dem - he is a lifelong Republican, a Federalist Society Member, who spent 18 years on the Pennsylvania GOP Executive Committee. He was selected by Sen. Pat Toomey as part of a trade.”
That explains everything.
Sen. Pat Toomey says Trump has “exhausted all plausible legal options,” congratulates Biden
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3908396/posts
The key word I used was "legally" certify. Certifying a bunch of illegal votes is not legally certifying.
Certification is the process the states use to formerly determine what votes were legally cast. So if a state certifies X votes, it’s determined that those votes are legal votes. I’ve not heard of a state ever changing the totals after certification.
Maybe you haven’t noticed this but Giuliani’s arguments are being laughed out of every single court. If Trump is gonna have any chance at all he needs better lawyers - two weeks ago.
I'm sure they will certify their votes - dead people and phony mail-in ballots be damned. That's why it won't stop there.
We are going to seriously need to deal with these seditious pieces of sh*t.
Reagan’s alternative to Bush was a co-presidency with Ford, a Henry Kissinger devotee who let Bush run wild as CIA director. Ford was despised by conservatives and would have made The Gipper’s battle against Carter more difficult.
Sure glad your not on the supreme court.
It was a judicial overreach. The result does not justify the means. Elections are state run and for the federal Supreme Court to swoop in was a gross violation of the 10th amendment.
The question is do we need an overreaching federal court to the state level, or are the states indeed sovreign. While the result was favorable to our side the fact is that it solidified the federal boot on the throat of the states.
So it comes down to the age old question — deontology bs utilitarianism. I agree that it is sometimes hard to be intellectually consistent. But in tibia case Jim Is correct.
As usual, your logic is flawless and you are correct although the opinion is unpopular. Thank you for standing up for what is right. Even if the USSC grants cert it is an unambiguous overreach of judicial power.
I actually think they will improperly grant cert because it’s just too juicy for them to exercise any modicum of judicial restraint.
>>> It was a judicial overreach. The result does not justify the means. Elections are state run and for the federal Supreme Court to swoop in was a gross violation of the 10th amendment.
Wow... Are you even paying attention to what is happening right now?
Do you realize that the leader of the free world is being picked by a handful of corrupt election officials???
What good is the Supreme court if it cannot uphold the constitution in state matters???
Do you even care that the majority of American votes were uploaded through the internet to servers in Germany where they were tabulated and manipulated before being reported back to the states????
If the Supreme Court cannot force states to abide by their own laws, and according to our federal constitution, then what good is it?
A STATE is NO LONGER Sovereign when it TRAMPLES ON OUR RIGHTS!!!
you want to make this about states rights when it is the states themselves here who are corrupt!
What makes State’s rights more important than INDIVIDUAL rights???
Huh?
What is next? States should have the right to re-institute slavery???
Where would your fear of the federal supreme court swooping in be in a case like that???
I’m assuming you voted.
I further assume you voted for trump, or else you wouldn’t be here.
Do you realize that if this is allowed to stand, then EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN who cast a legal vote was just denied their constitutional rights?
Your arguments are not constitutional. I don’t like not either but if we are to honor the constitution we know the following
The states run the elections. You are asking the federal Supreme Court to intercede where there is no jurisdiction. This is a gross expansion of power to a court that is generally unrestrained. I am sorry you don’t like the answer but you have not at all made a compelling argument except you don’t like my argument
Your slavery issue is a complete red herring. I believe slavery is abolished by amendment to the federal constitution. This requires 2/3 supermajority in both houses and supermajority ratification is the states. The constitution was legally amended and as the constitution is a pact among the several states slavery cannot be re-established. You need to get a grip because this argument is intellectually dishonest
The founders agreed that the best government was the least government and at the local levels. Each state is in charge of its own election. This is spelled out in Article 2 I believe. As such toj can rant and race all you want, but ir is you who are asking fedzilla to stick its very large nose in where it has no jurisdiction.
If you don’t like my argument take it up with the framers
But once it’s certified... it’s over. So it does stop there.
>>> The states run the elections. You are asking the federal Supreme Court to intercede where there is no jurisdiction.
If the constitution is not followed, then yes, the Supreme court DOES have jurisdiction.
In this case, election laws established by the state legislatures (required by constitution) were not followed, and/or were changed by the state courts or other elected officials NOT the legislature.
This DOES give SCOTUS jurisdiction.
Alito has already ruled and issued orders on this concerning ballots recieved after 8pm election day according to PA state election law.
Are you saying that Alito acted outside of his jurisdiction???
Hmmm???
Having practiced in Federal Court, this attorney was supposed to contact opposing counsel, and seek his agreement towards a continuance. It is the height of bad “legal manners” to not agree to a continuance for good cause, by opposing counsel. Almost all will assent to a request for additional time. It’s a time honored etiquette thing.
I believe Once they certify then President Trump can ask for a hand count with the original ballots..
In this case 5 days after final canvases are done!!
Three voters of an election district may request a recount in the county of their election district by submitting an affidavit alleging errors in the vote totals. The deadline to request such a recount is no later than five days after the election.[2] Three voters of an election district may also request a recount through the court of common pleas.[4] In order to conduct the recount in multiple election districts, requests must be made in each respective district following these guidelines.[4] The deadline to request such a recount is no later than five days after the completion of computational canvassing. If error or fraud is found, an additional five days is provided to make additional requests elsewhere.[5] Requester’s are responsible for costs associated with the recount unless the recount shows that fraud or substantial error occurred, in which case the costs are refunded.[4] There is no set deadline for the completion of requested recounts.
Please explain Florida in 2000, I need a “Constitutional” laugh riot.
In case you did not notice, there are more than 3 Articles plus an enormous amount of US codes that go into “everything”.
Trump’s lawyers are quitting because their families have been threatened AND other clients in the law firms have threatened to take their business elsewhere because they are defending Trump this s OUTRAGEOUS!!!
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.