Well that will mean 50 or 60 Democrat Representatives will have died or disappeared, so that will be quite a scandal.
Have fun and read only a few judgments - out of the 50 - that reject the cases presented by Trump. You should read before commenting.
That WON'T happen. And no, a "remote possibility" does NOT exist. Of course, if one defines "remote possibility" as same as the chances of being killed by a shark attack on Mars...
In my lifetime it has been true that Justices of the SC are notorious for not ruling as the president who appointed them thought they would.
It would seem to destroy your argument. You can scream "changed the law" all you want. Those who know disagree. I'm siding with those who know.
In such a process it is the States that vote, one vote per State. I don't think it will happen but it would not be the first time so it actually is a remote possibility.
You think? I believe it's been done two or three times in the past. I don't think we'll see it either but Trump is fighting on with something in mind.
Trump is delusional. What is happening is that he has surrounded himself with incompetent sycophants willing to affirm his delusions, and who are doing so to bolster their own self interest. The conman is being conned. Again.
He did nothing special for the economy in his first three years, concluded no important trade deals (NAFTA 2.0 is nothing special), and weakened our alliances.
An imaginary solution for an imaginary problem. The only "solutions" that will be proposed to this fantasy will be designed to suppress voters they think lean democrat. They want to ensure minority control by their party. The normal solution in a democracy would be to appeal to more voters in order to win more votes. But they no longer support or respect democracy. And this is no doubt tied to the fact that many of them believe their beliefs derive from divine authority, with democracy being an obstacle to them being implemented.
It's over. Will the Orange Oaf walk out of the White House on his own or will the military and/or police remove him?
Exactly. I have been saying that for weeks. 1) Biden WON. It is Over. It is a 10000% Certainty that Biden WILL be Sworn in on 1/20/2021. ^That is an Undeniable and Unchangeable FACT. 2) But, after Biden is sworn in, if there are realistic (note the word "realistic") "issues"--Then, fix it.
We already have the solution where they actually verify signatures and have a transparent process. It's called Utah. But, better yet, let's do like India and give every legal voter and ID Card. Right now, we are a Banana Republic with a ridiculous election process that is neither transparent or verifiable.
I suspect as much, too. They won't like what's crawling around on the underside of the rock if we turn it over.
What ad hominen??? What part of "but I wasn't specifically targeting you" you don't understand? Read it slowly, three times, see if you get it. As of for all the rest, when the two most conservative justices said they'd have heard the case BUT WOULD GRANT NO OTHER RELIEF, that was a clear message on the lack of merit. Do you actually think the learned Justices of the USSC weren't very aware of everything that is going on, including, because they knew it would end up on their doorsteps? Of course they read the complaint. They even waited for the four states being sued, to respond, then they ruled, several hours later (I think the 4 states had until 3 PM to respond, which they did, and the justices issued the notice of dismissal about 7 PM). Of course they knew in detail what was being claimed by each side. Still, they decided to walk away from it and allow the lower court's decisions to stand. You say they failed their duty. I say they didn't. I say they did what the majority of the American people wanted them to do: we, the 80 million+ who voted for Biden, wanted them to allow our votes to stand, to allow the state decisions to stand, within the sovereignty of each state, and to allow the duly elected President Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. to be inaugurated as the legitimate 46th POTUS, and that's precisely what the SC justices did (including the three nominated by the wannabe fascist dictator), and we thank them for it. As for the constitutional matter on how the states enhanced voting opportunities in the middle of deadly pandemic, address each state legislature and ask for better and more uniform procedures next time. This time, the ship has sailed and Biden won fair and square. This whole thing was NEVER about that. Maybe it was for you, and I commend you for it, but for most of these people trying to overturn the legitimate result of the election, it was simply about who lost. Had Trump won these very same states that had these very same rules you deem tainted, there would be no peep to protest the rules. It's only because Trump lost these states that Ken Paxton sued (well, that, and because he wants a pardon). He never thought of suing the other states that did the same or worse, but were carried by Trump, huh? What do YOU have to say about that? It's a direct question. I'd like to hear your answer. This time I *am* talking to you. Stop hiding behind "I'm not the topic of this thread." It's getting old. You can always have the option of getting the hell out of this thread if you don't want to stand behind your opinions under this excuse. Remember the saying: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
It will be interesting to see how it plays out. He was elected to weaken those alliances. Which would you prefer?
We can look at it. Across the country, there are gerrymandered districts, voter roll purges, absurd ID requirements, limited polling stations in poor communities, etc. We should end all of the nonsense.
He was chosen by Putin to weaken those alliances. The propaganda that filtered down to his simpleton base was "make them pay their fare share, because globalism is giving our white money to foreigners and brown people".