By Jim Von Meier
Why were the 60 or so cases presented by Trump of e******n f***d in the 2020 e******n thrown out of court?
Because contrary to what many believe, you can take anyone or entity to court, that’s not entirely true. It takes money to build and operate courthouses, heat/cooling, telephones/communications, clerks, stenographers, maintenance workers, judges, etc. You can bring them a potential “case” but you have to provide at least a shred of proof that a potential wrong may have been committed.
A judge will look at it and if you cannot provide that shred they are not going to let you tie-up the court system, the court’s time and thousands/millions of taxpayer dollars on an accusation that cannot be proven, or as some say, does not have adequate merit to allow it to proceed. That’s why even judges Trump appointed said it would be a waste of time. It wasn’t a conspiracy against Trump because he was such a great president and a threat to the swamp, they simply did their job. The v***r f***d claims were hearsay (gossip), there was not one iota of tangible proof.
Lawyers usually get warned the first few times they bring meritless cases but if they keep doing it, they can get punished; found in contempt, fined, jailed, suspended, even lose their license to practice law and sued like Giuliani and Powell are finding out. You can make all the accusations you want but you’d better be able to back it up, if not the victims can go forward with defamation and slander lawsuits and that’s to discourage people from lying spreading unfounded and untrue gossip.
Ironically for years Trump used the courts and technicalities to stall and stall the people suing him to get paid what he owed them until they ran out of money to pay their own lawyers and they’d either give up or settle for pennies on the dollar. I guess stacking the deck by appointing so many judges didn’t work out the way you thought it would. It’s taken a long time but payback is a b***h isn’t it, Mr. Trump?
Also, from Neil Gendzwill...
The 60 cases were thrown out due to one of 4 reasons:
Lack of standing. This means that either the court did not have jurisdiction or that the complainant did not have the right to sue. The most famous one was Texas vs Georgia et al that was bounced from the Supreme Court. States can’t tell other states how to run their e******ns. Even if the e******n in Georgia was improperly run, other states have no say.
Laches. This means that the complaint was made too late. There were a number of cases brought complaining that e******n rule changes or even existing law from previous e******ns were improper. The time to complain about those changes was when they were made, which was months or in some cases years before the e******n. You don’t get to wait until after the e******n, see that your guy didn’t win, and then complain that the rules are unfair.
Lack of evidence. In most cases where the complainant had standing and laches were not an issue, the evidence presented was weak or non-existent. The famous affidavits that people keep talking about were typically from people who misunderstood the e******n process and/or what they were observing.
Unreasonable remedies. In civil law, the remedy is the thing the complainant gets in return for having suffered some wrong. In the 1 case that was successful, the complaint was that observers were being kept too far away. The judge ruled that they should be allowed closer. He was not asked to rule that the whole e******n was invalidated because some observers were 10 feet away from the counting rather than 6: that would have been silly. Yet that was the ask in several cases: the claim was that some small amount of v**es were incorrectly counted. The remedy in that case should be not to count those v**es. But the ask was that the whole state be overturned, which drastically oversteps what should be done and in some cases what the judge has authority to do.
I also want to point out that even in cases 1 and 2, cases 3 and 4 would have applied had the judges agreed to hear it. In every case the evidence was weak and/or the remedy was ridiculous. The fact that they were dismissed on standing or laches made some people think that only a “technicality” prevented them from winning: this was not the case. The technicalities prevented the courts from wasting their time listening to bulls**t.
Strycker
Loc: The middle of somewhere else.
slatten49 wrote:
By Jim Von Meier
Why were the 60 or so cases presented by Trump of e******n f***d in the 2020 e******n thrown out of court?
Because contrary to what many believe, you can take anyone or entity to court, that’s not entirely true. It takes money to build and operate courthouses, heat/cooling, telephones/communications, clerks, stenographers, maintenance workers, judges, etc. You can bring them a potential “case” but you have to provide at least a shred of proof that a potential wrong may have been committed.
A judge will look at it and if you cannot provide that shred they are not going to let you tie-up the court system, the court’s time and thousands/millions of taxpayer dollars on an accusation that cannot be proven, or as some say, does not have adequate merit to allow it to proceed. That’s why even judges Trump appointed said it would be a waste of time. It wasn’t a conspiracy against Trump because he was such a great president and a threat to the swamp, they simply did their job. The v***r f***d claims were hearsay (gossip), there was not one iota of tangible proof.
Lawyers usually get warned the first few times they bring meritless cases but if they keep doing it, they can get punished; found in contempt, fined, jailed, suspended, even lose their license to practice law and sued like Giuliani and Powell are finding out. You can make all the accusations you want but you’d better be able to back it up, if not the victims can go forward with defamation and slander lawsuits and that’s to discourage people from lying spreading unfounded and untrue gossip.
Ironically for years Trump used the courts and technicalities to stall and stall the people suing him to get paid what he owed them until they ran out of money to pay their own lawyers and they’d either give up or settle for pennies on the dollar. I guess stacking the deck by appointing so many judges didn’t work out the way you thought it would. It’s taken a long time but payback is a b***h isn’t it, Mr. Trump?
Also, from Neil Gendzwill...
The 60 cases were thrown out due to one of 4 reasons:
Lack of standing. This means that either the court did not have jurisdiction or that the complainant did not have the right to sue. The most famous one was Texas vs Georgia et al that was bounced from the Supreme Court. States can’t tell other states how to run their e******ns. Even if the e******n in Georgia was improperly run, other states have no say.
Laches. This means that the complaint was made too late. There were a number of cases brought complaining that e******n rule changes or even existing law from previous e******ns were improper. The time to complain about those changes was when they were made, which was months or in some cases years before the e******n. You don’t get to wait until after the e******n, see that your guy didn’t win, and then complain that the rules are unfair.
Lack of evidence. In most cases where the complainant had standing and laches were not an issue, the evidence presented was weak or non-existent. The famous affidavits that people keep talking about were typically from people who misunderstood the e******n process and/or what they were observing.
Unreasonable remedies. In civil law, the remedy is the thing the complainant gets in return for having suffered some wrong. In the 1 case that was successful, the complaint was that observers were being kept too far away. The judge ruled that they should be allowed closer. He was not asked to rule that the whole e******n was invalidated because some observers were 10 feet away from the counting rather than 6: that would have been silly. Yet that was the ask in several cases: the claim was that some small amount of v**es were incorrectly counted. The remedy in that case should be not to count those v**es. But the ask was that the whole state be overturned, which drastically oversteps what should be done and in some cases what the judge has authority to do.
I also want to point out that even in cases 1 and 2, cases 3 and 4 would have applied had the judges agreed to hear it. In every case the evidence was weak and/or the remedy was ridiculous. The fact that they were dismissed on standing or laches made some people think that only a “technicality” prevented them from winning: this was not the case. The technicalities prevented the courts from wasting their time listening to bulls**t.
By Jim Von Meier br br Why were the 60 or so case... (
show quote)
A few weeks at the time was not enough time to investigate and present anything but a rushed weak case.
If there is anything of substance about 2020 fraud this is Trumps opportunity to lay it out. This J** 6th indictment of Trump will likely open up the court to hearing as much 2020 e******n f***d claims as Trumps attorneys want to submit. He could bring in a thousand witnesses who testify that they personally believe the e******n was c***ted and why. Death by a thousand cuts that when added up could alter the results of an e******n. A giant can of worms for the Democrats if this trial creates further doubt about 2020 fairness and results. It all goes to Trumps beliefs about the e******n and his intents. If e******n f***d claims are not allowed by the judge then the court is rigging the case.
slatten49 wrote:
By Jim Von Meier
Why were the 60 or so cases presented by Trump of e******n f***d in the 2020 e******n thrown out of court?
Because contrary to what many believe, you can take anyone or entity to court, that’s not entirely true. It takes money to build and operate courthouses, heat/cooling, telephones/communications, clerks, stenographers, maintenance workers, judges, etc. You can bring them a potential “case” but you have to provide at least a shred of proof that a potential wrong may have been committed.
A judge will look at it and if you cannot provide that shred they are not going to let you tie-up the court system, the court’s time and thousands/millions of taxpayer dollars on an accusation that cannot be proven, or as some say, does not have adequate merit to allow it to proceed. That’s why even judges Trump appointed said it would be a waste of time. It wasn’t a conspiracy against Trump because he was such a great president and a threat to the swamp, they simply did their job. The v***r f***d claims were hearsay (gossip), there was not one iota of tangible proof.
Lawyers usually get warned the first few times they bring meritless cases but if they keep doing it, they can get punished; found in contempt, fined, jailed, suspended, even lose their license to practice law and sued like Giuliani and Powell are finding out. You can make all the accusations you want but you’d better be able to back it up, if not the victims can go forward with defamation and slander lawsuits and that’s to discourage people from lying spreading unfounded and untrue gossip.
Ironically for years Trump used the courts and technicalities to stall and stall the people suing him to get paid what he owed them until they ran out of money to pay their own lawyers and they’d either give up or settle for pennies on the dollar. I guess stacking the deck by appointing so many judges didn’t work out the way you thought it would. It’s taken a long time but payback is a b***h isn’t it, Mr. Trump?
Also, from Neil Gendzwill...
The 60 cases were thrown out due to one of 4 reasons:
Lack of standing. This means that either the court did not have jurisdiction or that the complainant did not have the right to sue. The most famous one was Texas vs Georgia et al that was bounced from the Supreme Court. States can’t tell other states how to run their e******ns. Even if the e******n in Georgia was improperly run, other states have no say.
Laches. This means that the complaint was made too late. There were a number of cases brought complaining that e******n rule changes or even existing law from previous e******ns were improper. The time to complain about those changes was when they were made, which was months or in some cases years before the e******n. You don’t get to wait until after the e******n, see that your guy didn’t win, and then complain that the rules are unfair.
Lack of evidence. In most cases where the complainant had standing and laches were not an issue, the evidence presented was weak or non-existent. The famous affidavits that people keep talking about were typically from people who misunderstood the e******n process and/or what they were observing.
Unreasonable remedies. In civil law, the remedy is the thing the complainant gets in return for having suffered some wrong. In the 1 case that was successful, the complaint was that observers were being kept too far away. The judge ruled that they should be allowed closer. He was not asked to rule that the whole e******n was invalidated because some observers were 10 feet away from the counting rather than 6: that would have been silly. Yet that was the ask in several cases: the claim was that some small amount of v**es were incorrectly counted. The remedy in that case should be not to count those v**es. But the ask was that the whole state be overturned, which drastically oversteps what should be done and in some cases what the judge has authority to do.
I also want to point out that even in cases 1 and 2, cases 3 and 4 would have applied had the judges agreed to hear it. In every case the evidence was weak and/or the remedy was ridiculous. The fact that they were dismissed on standing or laches made some people think that only a “technicality” prevented them from winning: this was not the case. The technicalities prevented the courts from wasting their time listening to bulls**t.
By Jim Von Meier br br Why were the 60 or so case... (
show quote)
Here is one that did not get dropped.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/democrat-arrested-and-indicted-on-82-counts-of-v**er-fraud/ar-AA1eK1Y1?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2961b7d390df43df80717f40b0433bc8&ei=89The e******n was s****n by more sophisticated means than bogus v**es, we all know that.
In this case, all judges who ruled on this matter, must have been either democrats, or. just plain "Woke"! Of which and I do not want to believe this, i.e. even the judges on the Supreme Court, would not "touch" the case on the matter! If they had, they would of at least noticed massive v***r f***d in the last p**********l e******n! Under "no" circumstances am I saying that "trump" won the e******n, however, they would have discovered, perhaps many, many, dead people actually v**ed in the last p**********l e******n. V***r r**********n would have been found to eliminate any possible fraud in that respect if investigated by any serious investigator! The only solution to stop this bulls**t, is, to require v**er ID, and absolutely not any mail in b****ts, unless you are in the military, living in an other country, or if you are a person who is disabled, and cannot travel to the polls, period!
That's my story, and I am sticking to it!
slatten49 wrote:
By Jim Von Meier
Why were the 60 or so cases presented by Trump of e******n f***d in the 2020 e******n thrown out of court?
Because contrary to what many believe, you can take anyone or entity to court, that’s not entirely true. It takes money to build and operate courthouses, heat/cooling, telephones/communications, clerks, stenographers, maintenance workers, judges, etc. You can bring them a potential “case” but you have to provide at least a shred of proof that a potential wrong may have been committed.
A judge will look at it and if you cannot provide that shred they are not going to let you tie-up the court system, the court’s time and thousands/millions of taxpayer dollars on an accusation that cannot be proven, or as some say, does not have adequate merit to allow it to proceed. That’s why even judges Trump appointed said it would be a waste of time. It wasn’t a conspiracy against Trump because he was such a great president and a threat to the swamp, they simply did their job. The v***r f***d claims were hearsay (gossip), there was not one iota of tangible proof.
Lawyers usually get warned the first few times they bring meritless cases but if they keep doing it, they can get punished; found in contempt, fined, jailed, suspended, even lose their license to practice law and sued like Giuliani and Powell are finding out. You can make all the accusations you want but you’d better be able to back it up, if not the victims can go forward with defamation and slander lawsuits and that’s to discourage people from lying spreading unfounded and untrue gossip.
Ironically for years Trump used the courts and technicalities to stall and stall the people suing him to get paid what he owed them until they ran out of money to pay their own lawyers and they’d either give up or settle for pennies on the dollar. I guess stacking the deck by appointing so many judges didn’t work out the way you thought it would. It’s taken a long time but payback is a b***h isn’t it, Mr. Trump?
Also, from Neil Gendzwill...
The 60 cases were thrown out due to one of 4 reasons:
Lack of standing. This means that either the court did not have jurisdiction or that the complainant did not have the right to sue. The most famous one was Texas vs Georgia et al that was bounced from the Supreme Court. States can’t tell other states how to run their e******ns. Even if the e******n in Georgia was improperly run, other states have no say.
Laches. This means that the complaint was made too late. There were a number of cases brought complaining that e******n rule changes or even existing law from previous e******ns were improper. The time to complain about those changes was when they were made, which was months or in some cases years before the e******n. You don’t get to wait until after the e******n, see that your guy didn’t win, and then complain that the rules are unfair.
Lack of evidence. In most cases where the complainant had standing and laches were not an issue, the evidence presented was weak or non-existent. The famous affidavits that people keep talking about were typically from people who misunderstood the e******n process and/or what they were observing.
Unreasonable remedies. In civil law, the remedy is the thing the complainant gets in return for having suffered some wrong. In the 1 case that was successful, the complaint was that observers were being kept too far away. The judge ruled that they should be allowed closer. He was not asked to rule that the whole e******n was invalidated because some observers were 10 feet away from the counting rather than 6: that would have been silly. Yet that was the ask in several cases: the claim was that some small amount of v**es were incorrectly counted. The remedy in that case should be not to count those v**es. But the ask was that the whole state be overturned, which drastically oversteps what should be done and in some cases what the judge has authority to do.
I also want to point out that even in cases 1 and 2, cases 3 and 4 would have applied had the judges agreed to hear it. In every case the evidence was weak and/or the remedy was ridiculous. The fact that they were dismissed on standing or laches made some people think that only a “technicality” prevented them from winning: this was not the case. The technicalities prevented the courts from wasting their time listening to bulls**t.
By Jim Von Meier br br Why were the 60 or so case... (
show quote)
Another view:
Why Trump’s E******n-F***d Lawsuits Flopped
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/why-trumps-e******n-f***d-lawsuits-flopped/In an e******n for any other office, it’s possible to conduct a full investigation. But in this p**********l race, all 50 states by law had to certify their results by December 8. Then the E*******l College was set to meet on December 14 to elect the president.
That’s a very short time window in which to collect clear evidence of fraud or irregularities great enough to change the outcome, to file lawsuits, and then to have them decided. The result would then go to a Supreme Court highly reluctant to get involved in a p**********l race after its disputed role in the Bush-v.-Gore recount in 2000.
Does this mean, there should not be a through, investigation in all legal matters falsely brought against Donald Trump? By all lawyers who dream up the charges?
Ray Smith wrote:
Does this mean, there should not be a through, investigation in all legal matters falsely brought against Donald Trump? By all lawyers who dream up the charges?
Why investigate when we could just choot 'em an put 'em in da boat.
Never read his propaganda ! Except in non political ! If there were 60 cases there is substantial evidence!
slatten49 wrote:
By Jim Von Meier
Why were the 60 or so cases presented by Trump of e******n f***d in the 2020 e******n thrown out of court?
Because contrary to what many believe, you can take anyone or entity to court, that’s not entirely true. It takes money to build and operate courthouses, heat/cooling, telephones/communications, clerks, stenographers, maintenance workers, judges, etc. You can bring them a potential “case” but you have to provide at least a shred of proof that a potential wrong may have been committed.
A judge will look at it and if you cannot provide that shred they are not going to let you tie-up the court system, the court’s time and thousands/millions of taxpayer dollars on an accusation that cannot be proven, or as some say, does not have adequate merit to allow it to proceed. That’s why even judges Trump appointed said it would be a waste of time. It wasn’t a conspiracy against Trump because he was such a great president and a threat to the swamp, they simply did their job. The v***r f***d claims were hearsay (gossip), there was not one iota of tangible proof.
Lawyers usually get warned the first few times they bring meritless cases but if they keep doing it, they can get punished; found in contempt, fined, jailed, suspended, even lose their license to practice law and sued like Giuliani and Powell are finding out. You can make all the accusations you want but you’d better be able to back it up, if not the victims can go forward with defamation and slander lawsuits and that’s to discourage people from lying spreading unfounded and untrue gossip.
Ironically for years Trump used the courts and technicalities to stall and stall the people suing him to get paid what he owed them until they ran out of money to pay their own lawyers and they’d either give up or settle for pennies on the dollar. I guess stacking the deck by appointing so many judges didn’t work out the way you thought it would. It’s taken a long time but payback is a b***h isn’t it, Mr. Trump?
Also, from Neil Gendzwill...
The 60 cases were thrown out due to one of 4 reasons:
Lack of standing. This means that either the court did not have jurisdiction or that the complainant did not have the right to sue. The most famous one was Texas vs Georgia et al that was bounced from the Supreme Court. States can’t tell other states how to run their e******ns. Even if the e******n in Georgia was improperly run, other states have no say.
Laches. This means that the complaint was made too late. There were a number of cases brought complaining that e******n rule changes or even existing law from previous e******ns were improper. The time to complain about those changes was when they were made, which was months or in some cases years before the e******n. You don’t get to wait until after the e******n, see that your guy didn’t win, and then complain that the rules are unfair.
Lack of evidence. In most cases where the complainant had standing and laches were not an issue, the evidence presented was weak or non-existent. The famous affidavits that people keep talking about were typically from people who misunderstood the e******n process and/or what they were observing.
Unreasonable remedies. In civil law, the remedy is the thing the complainant gets in return for having suffered some wrong. In the 1 case that was successful, the complaint was that observers were being kept too far away. The judge ruled that they should be allowed closer. He was not asked to rule that the whole e******n was invalidated because some observers were 10 feet away from the counting rather than 6: that would have been silly. Yet that was the ask in several cases: the claim was that some small amount of v**es were incorrectly counted. The remedy in that case should be not to count those v**es. But the ask was that the whole state be overturned, which drastically oversteps what should be done and in some cases what the judge has authority to do.
I also want to point out that even in cases 1 and 2, cases 3 and 4 would have applied had the judges agreed to hear it. In every case the evidence was weak and/or the remedy was ridiculous. The fact that they were dismissed on standing or laches made some people think that only a “technicality” prevented them from winning: this was not the case. The technicalities prevented the courts from wasting their time listening to bulls**t.
By Jim Von Meier br br Why were the 60 or so case... (
show quote)
The courts are stacked. They are owned. We can trust no one in government and things will only get worse. Keep your eyes open and your mind clear.
You must have standing. Which in layman's terms means you have to show you've been harmed, Biden not being sworn in YET meant no standing.
You guys all have way too much faith in the courts
slatten49 wrote:
By Jim Von Meier
Why were the 60 or so cases presented by Trump of e******n f***d in the 2020 e******n thrown out of court?
Because contrary to what many believe, you can take anyone or entity to court, that’s not entirely true. It takes money to build and operate courthouses, heat/cooling, telephones/communications, clerks, stenographers, maintenance workers, judges, etc. You can bring them a potential “case” but you have to provide at least a shred of proof that a potential wrong may have been committed.
A judge will look at it and if you cannot provide that shred they are not going to let you tie-up the court system, the court’s time and thousands/millions of taxpayer dollars on an accusation that cannot be proven, or as some say, does not have adequate merit to allow it to proceed. That’s why even judges Trump appointed said it would be a waste of time. It wasn’t a conspiracy against Trump because he was such a great president and a threat to the swamp, they simply did their job. The v***r f***d claims were hearsay (gossip), there was not one iota of tangible proof.
Lawyers usually get warned the first few times they bring meritless cases but if they keep doing it, they can get punished; found in contempt, fined, jailed, suspended, even lose their license to practice law and sued like Giuliani and Powell are finding out. You can make all the accusations you want but you’d better be able to back it up, if not the victims can go forward with defamation and slander lawsuits and that’s to discourage people from lying spreading unfounded and untrue gossip.
Ironically for years Trump used the courts and technicalities to stall and stall the people suing him to get paid what he owed them until they ran out of money to pay their own lawyers and they’d either give up or settle for pennies on the dollar. I guess stacking the deck by appointing so many judges didn’t work out the way you thought it would. It’s taken a long time but payback is a b***h isn’t it, Mr. Trump?
Also, from Neil Gendzwill...
The 60 cases were thrown out due to one of 4 reasons:
Lack of standing. This means that either the court did not have jurisdiction or that the complainant did not have the right to sue. The most famous one was Texas vs Georgia et al that was bounced from the Supreme Court. States can’t tell other states how to run their e******ns. Even if the e******n in Georgia was improperly run, other states have no say.
Laches. This means that the complaint was made too late. There were a number of cases brought complaining that e******n rule changes or even existing law from previous e******ns were improper. The time to complain about those changes was when they were made, which was months or in some cases years before the e******n. You don’t get to wait until after the e******n, see that your guy didn’t win, and then complain that the rules are unfair.
Lack of evidence. In most cases where the complainant had standing and laches were not an issue, the evidence presented was weak or non-existent. The famous affidavits that people keep talking about were typically from people who misunderstood the e******n process and/or what they were observing.
Unreasonable remedies. In civil law, the remedy is the thing the complainant gets in return for having suffered some wrong. In the 1 case that was successful, the complaint was that observers were being kept too far away. The judge ruled that they should be allowed closer. He was not asked to rule that the whole e******n was invalidated because some observers were 10 feet away from the counting rather than 6: that would have been silly. Yet that was the ask in several cases: the claim was that some small amount of v**es were incorrectly counted. The remedy in that case should be not to count those v**es. But the ask was that the whole state be overturned, which drastically oversteps what should be done and in some cases what the judge has authority to do.
I also want to point out that even in cases 1 and 2, cases 3 and 4 would have applied had the judges agreed to hear it. In every case the evidence was weak and/or the remedy was ridiculous. The fact that they were dismissed on standing or laches made some people think that only a “technicality” prevented them from winning: this was not the case. The technicalities prevented the courts from wasting their time listening to bulls**t.
By Jim Von Meier br br Why were the 60 or so case... (
show quote)
All this tells me....is that this Republic....is "overridden" with narcissistic, & evil demoncraps...
"Like too many maggots on a gut wagon"!
Next e******n: Take along a can of *Raid...when you see a *Demoncrap...spray them "liberally", with *Raid...[ *no pun intended]....until they v**e sensibly?
[ maggots cannot survive that "Raid product"!...
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
