Trump is the Perfect Sore Loser

Thanks, I didn't know that.
So what will be an illegal or invalid vote, is there such a ting? For example a non citizen or non resident of the state or all this doesn't exist?
For example - in 2004 Crayton was convicted of impersonation fraud for illegally voting in her sister's name. Should this vote be counted anyway?

Another example in 2016
The Government Accountability Institute concluded in its report that thousands of votes in the 2016 election were illegal duplicate votes.
These got counted, can the duplicates be removed? Or this fraud is counted anyway?
The Institute concluded in its report that thousands of votes in the 2016 election were illegal duplicate votes from people who registered and voted in more than one state.

So the count remains the same even if - The probability of 45,000 illegal duplicate votes is the low end of the spectrum, and it does not even account for other types of fraud such as ineligible voting by noncitizens and felons and absentee ballot fraud?

I'm confused.

 

For individual cases like you mention there are some unknowns. For example, if the precinct is not sure the vote will count or not then they may accept what is called a provisional ballot. I've never seen a provisional ballot but I assume it is similar to a mail-in ballot in that the identification is on the outside. After the question is answered that caused the provisional ballot in the first place, if it was positive then the provisional ballot envelope would be opened and the ballot would probably be inside another envelope to keep it secret. That would then be added to the legal votes. If it was not valid then it would just be discarded. If the person tried to vote twice and was caught before the ballot was accepted then it would not count. If they were caught after the ballot was accepted then it would be counted unless it was still in a provisional vote envelope. I'm sure that the example you gave about thousands of illegal votes that they were all counted with the legal votes.

 

You keep saying this as if it was still an unanswered question. It is not.

 

Ah, yes. The I'll-D0-Anything-to-Keep-Out-of-Prison Pardon Quest. Now available for PlayStation and Xbox.

 

Its most likely the case by now.
Some are still waiting for remaining few cases to conclude to move on.

 

No, they're not. They're just doing everything possible to muddy the waters. It has nothing to do with righting alleged wrongs (because those wrongs aren't actually alleged).

Instead, this is merely a scam to raise money from gullible Republicans to be used on other things besides this charade. That's the part that cracks me up!

It also buys Rudy time so he can get his pardon before his indictment.

 

For a first time since this tread started I don't know what to say.

 

I hereby declare Lerner to be the winner for the day with that post!

 

U.S. Supreme Court Rule 17, which governs original actions filed by a state against another state, has an interesting, two step process. The plaintiff state files a motion for leave to file its complaint and the defendant state has the opportunity to respond to that motion within 60 days. In the Texas case, the responses are due today. Keep in mind that this isn't the actual complaint and application for relief; this is just the motion asking permission to file the complaint. Well, the rule doesn't explicitly state that a majority of justices must agree to allow the complaint to be filed but it does say that the motion and responses will be distributed to the Court so I ASSUME that means the Court as a whole decides whether to grant the motion. If so, the suit is doomed. Trump appointed just three of the nine and the rest will certainly want to keep the court out without having to rule.

 

Also, to judge from the now infamous Pennsylvania appeal, even the three Trump appointees don't want to touch this thing. Nor should they. Their involvement is unnecessary and bound to upset half the population whatever they decide.

 

Get this, in the filing Ken Paxton submitted to the Supremes, it claims that the fraud was so good it was rendered undetectable!

Filing Full of Holes

So, according to them, a lack of evidence of fraud is evidence of fraud. Are they really that desperate? (Okay, don't answer that.)

Q: Why do elephants paint their toenails red?
A: To hide in cherry trees! Have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree? No? See how good it works!


And so it goes.

 

Well...there will always be vaudeville.

 

The attorneys general of 17 states, plus the Trump campaign, have joined Texas in this suit. All of these states were won by Trump and can safely be considered "red" states. They want the election overturned and handed to Trump without any basis for doing so.

We have a civil war on our hands. It's been brewing for years, but here it is. It was going to be triggered the moment the Republicans lost the White House after having regained it (through non-democratic means, naturally) from, you know, that guy.

It's a cold war, fortunately. But with armed protestors surrounding election officials' houses as they've done recently, it could heat up. What will they do when they finally realize this election truly is lost? It is to shudder.

 

Okay, I admit that I did the whole election fraud thing by myself in all four battle ground states. What's the proof you may say? Well I wanted Biden to win, or to put it more accurately, I really wanted Trump to lose. The final proof to this though is that it is my job to clean the red toenail polish off of the elephant toes when they leave the cherry tree. Have you ever seen an elephant running around with red toenail polish? No, that demonstrates just how great I am at running these kind of things!

 

Actual scientists: A lack of evidence is not evidence.

Republicans: Yes it is!

 

I'm not sure what form a civil war would take. The country isn't like it was in 1861 where people travelled little between their states. There were clear regional borders then and people identified with their states. The state governments themselves rebelled against federal authority. No state that I know of is talking about secession. (Speaking as a New Mexican, I wouldn't mind if, say, Texas went but we should be so lucky.) Nowadays, the individual citizen has a close personal relationship with the federal government, something that just wasn't true before about 1933.

Suppose the Supreme Court acts and, effectively, either steals the election for Trump or confirms the election for Biden. It ought to do neither and I think it WILL do neither, but suppose it does, about half the population is upset. Well, okay what happens next? The Electors vote on Monday and their votes go to Washington instantly for counting. Will those votes be intercepted? Hard to see how. Will attempts be made to intimidate the Electors into voting for the opposite candidate to the one who won the state? Again, it's hard to see how. So finally the votes get to the floor of Congress. One especially loud mouthed GOP Congressman says he's going to challenge the votes but he can't unless he does so in writing in advance and has a Senator sign off as well. What is more, unless the votes are from Wisconsin, they were certified before the "safe harbor" date and by statute aren't subject to challenge. Even if they are challenged, BOTH Houses must agree to reject a State's votes or those votes are counted. Congress will not throw the election either way.

Now where might a violent movement actually apply their violence? Bombing federal buildings? Horrible but we've seen it before now and the FBI is pretty efficient. Shooting public officials? I don't know. There have always been murderous wackos willing to shoot people; that's why the FBI says white supremacy groups are the biggest threat for domestic terrorism but again, there's nothing new here. Besides, these things would do nothing toward changing who is President.

I do not think any violent groups will be able to seize control of individual state governments and compel those governments to rebel against federal authority. I also do not think that the VAST majority of Americans are prepared to kill, or be killed, over Donald Trump's second term, lost or awarded. Such an uprising as the term "civil war" suggests looks pretty near impossible to me.

Just musings.

 

I really don't think Trump expects to win. He is just creating chaos because it makes him feel better and allows him to solicit more money from his supporters. Biden will be President but Trump will likely continue trying to make noise. His 2024 run is more to that end, creating chaos, making him feel better and soliciting money from his supporters. This is his cash cow. He'll milk it until it's dry.

 

A cold civil war with occasional flare-ups (from armed fools). This with a Biden administration in charge. The war won't be fought over this election, for this election is just a symptom of what's wrong with our country.

Or, perhaps, a guerrilla war.

 

Again, though...with what goal? We already have terrorists in this country. They've done some serious harm at times, killing many innocent people, but they have never mounted anything like a successful challenge to legitimate authority. I do not like the consequences of this long running terrorism. For example, when I started in the law thirty years ago, I could walk into any Judge's chambers and ask to see the Judge. Now, there are metal detectors and security gates everywhere including my own courthouse. A new federal courthouse in my city looks like what it truly is; a fortress erected by a government afraid of its own people. But again, no one seems to be questioning the authority of public officials to perform their tasks. Not even the worst of the election counting protests ever did that; they often said, "Do your job!' and "Count every vote!" The irony is, when those election workers did exactly that, Trump lost in the battleground states.

 

I think a good example of what you describe is the plot to kidnap and murder Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

I agree the cause is not Trump. Trump just took advantage of it and stoked that fire as best he could. There seems to be overlap with the white supremacy movement as well? I'm not saying they're all racists but the racists are part of that grievance culture.