US Politics The 2020 Trump Presidency Thread

[AutoTripper]

So giys/girls, hope you all well.

Not here to challenge today. Just wanted to shatr this inside election outcome update from- Yes, that craxy man Simon Parkes again lol!

I honestly don't know what will happen, and I hope I won't argue with any of you here again.

Just thought this might be an inyerrsting muse, either way:

 

[AutoTripper]

I agree that it's not too late, but we have to really be vigilant and hold people accountable. And we also have to stop hating and disrespecting each other. The powers that be have created this division through social engineering, but the only reason it works is because people have decided to treat each other badly. We have caused this division. The fact that it was intended to happen does not absolve us of this. We have the power to heal it ourselves by trying to understand each other instead of throwing shade and insults (and worse).

Good words. We are similar in our pure intentions and best wishes for humanity.

You know, really bizarrely the last few days I've honestly started wondering if humanity really is not the long-term project or experiments of some alien race.

please don't get me wrong I've never had the slightest fascination with the whole alien and spacecraft thing I wait till I see something for myself before I really buy into it.

 

[Xorkoth]

To be honest if we found out that was true I wouldn't really be surprised, though I definitely am not in the camp of believing we are. We probably aren't, but it would explain the sudden rise of advanced civilization, the earliest civilization we know, which gets more advanced the farther back you look.

 

[TheInvisibleStoner]

Bahahaha. The memes. I love them.

 

[JessFR]

It's amazing how trump fanatics will tell you over and over how you shouldn't believe anything the mainstream media tells you, that you should be skeptical about what you hear.

But they will believe anything Trump tells them without a shred of evidence.

 

[AutoTripper]

It's amazing how trump fanatics will tell you over and over how you shouldn't believe anything the mainstream media tells you, that you should be skeptical about what you hear.

But they will believe anything Trump tells them without a shred of evidence.

Well Simon Parkes has claimed, the real reason the trump legal team repeatedly strangely denied having evidence or allegation at the majority of courts,,was just a tactiful part of the process to get to the Supreme court much faster, in light of circumstances and timing.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

it would explain the sudden rise of advanced civilization, the earliest civilization we know, which gets more advanced the farther back you look.

I think we have a tendency to advance to such an extent that we self-destruct. There is madness in the stars. Just look at Michael Jackson.

 

[JessFR]

Well Simon Parkes has claimed, the real reason the trump legal team repeatedly strangely denied having evidence or allegation at the majority of courts,,was just a tactiful part of the process to get to the Supreme court much faster, in light of circumstances and timing.

Well that would certainly be more proof that trumps legal team is hilariously incompetent.

You're not gonna get to the Supreme Court if you don't have evidence. You don't get to relitigate everything on appeal. That's not how the legal process works. If you don't have any evidence, higher courts simply won't accept the case for appeal. And even if by some miracle they did, you won't be allowed to bring in new evidence, that's not how this works.

 

[AutoTripper]

Well that would certainly be more proof that trumps legal team is hilariously incompetent.

You're not gonna get to the Supreme Court if you don't have evidence. You don't get to relitigate everything on appeal. That's not how the legal process works.

Well you know tons more aboit this than me I know. I'm late to the party, the technicalities of politics, especially American, is brand new to me and I'm not even trying to grasp it.

I just thought, beforehand, that it seemed very strange to me how theybwould even turn up at these courts, allegedly with evidence and charges, and bluntly deny having either.

 

[JessFR]

Well you know tons more aboit this than me I know. I'm late to the party, the technicalities of politics, especially American, is brand new to me and I'm not even trying to grasp it.

I just thought, beforehand, that it seemed very strange to me how theybwould even turn up at these courts, allegedly with evidence and charges, and bluntly deny having either.

It's not strange at all.

In court, you won't get anywhere with the mind of rambling conspiracies trump uses to convince his followers.

You need specific, verifiable incidents of fraud, and you need those incidents to show that there was such a systemic pattern of fraud that theres no reasonable option but to throw out pretty much all the votes.

They don't have that, they never had it. And 99.99% likelyhood it's cause it doesn't exist.

But trumps a narcissist, he can't stand being told what he doesn't wanna hear. So any competent lawyer will get fired for not doing things the way he wants. Hence why the competent lawyers have all left the case.

And the resulting lawyers, who are people who are as not a lawyer as you can possibly get and still practice law, have no idea what they're doing. And are just getting laughed out of court.

Another thing does doesn't help. Is, you actually have to tell the truth in court. If you don't, you will face perjury charges. And if you're a lawyer, you'll be sanctioned and have your license taken away.

And that's a big problem for a president who is practically dishonesty personified.

Even with the best legal team you'd probably lose this effort to change the election result. But this team is so incompetent they would probably fail even if massive fraud actually did exist and was highly provable.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

@JessFR... I don't think Trump's lawyers are incompetent. They have been assigned an impossible task, like trying to push a not-guilty verdict for Jeffrey Dahmer. They have to present something, even if they don't have anything to present. Incompetence implies that there is evidence that they aren't presenting or that there is something else they actually could do. They are just blowing smoke up Trump's ass and taking his money. As long as they pretend like he has a case, they still get paid. This is certainly unethical. I think the lawyers who left didn't want to tarnish their reputations for cash and the ones who stayed behind couldn't give a fuck about how or why they get paid.

 

[JessFR]

No they're incompetent. It's not just that they're being asked to do the impossible. They're incompetent. The competent lawyers left a while back.

The filing documents have been riddled with typos. They've argued for things that actually hurt their case, they fail to recognize obvious legal issues. They are making claims that never had any chance whatsoever of going anywhere.

I was gonna say earlier, lots of these lawsuits are over laws that existed before the election. As a result, there's a huge problem with trying to base a lawsuit off them. There's a doctrine in law that means if you choose not to sue when you could have, such as, because you thought you'd win the election, you give up the right to sue.

If you had a competent legal team, yeah you're right you'd almost certainly still lose, but they would be able to make far better arguments, they'd have almost no chance of throwing out enough votes to make a difference, but they could probably get some thrown out.

Instead they ask the courts for things that have no basis in law and contradict legal doctrine. Such as arguing for fraud but only want the presidential votes thrown out but not the congressional ones.

Or making crazy equal protection arguments and saying that because a couple voters couldn't fix their ballot, rather than having their ballots counted, EVERYONE else's ballots have to be thrown out.

Good lawyers don't deliberately make themselves look like shitty lawyers. The problem here is a bunch of these lawyers aren't even really lawyers anymore. They haven't practiced in decades, it's just they're close to trump and are still theoretically able to practice, so they're in

 

[birdup.snaildown]

@JessFR. Like I said, they need to do *something*. There are no actual cards to play, so they are putting down an ace of spades with a three of hearts and calling it a pair. Unless you can come up with a hand they could play, I don't see how you can argue they're incompetent?

 

[JessFR]

@JessFR. Like I said, they need to do *something*. There are no actual cards to play, so they are putting down an ace of spades with a three of hearts and calling it a pair. Unless you can come up with a hand they could play, I don't see how you can argue they're incompetent?

It's not that there's some great evidence they could have played, it's that there's no requirement to be so laughably incompetent in order to basically appear to be doing something.

No, since there's not actually any huge fraud, there's no evidence of huge fraud, so that's a bust. What they could do though...

1. Present court documents that have been spell checked.
2. Ask the court for things there's a snowballs chance in hell that the court might grant. Sure, it won't affect enough votes to matter, but from their perspective they wanna cast doubt on the election and winning anything would be helpful.
3. Not let Rudy Giuliani make arguments where he makes things worse by not understanding legal scrutiny and not knowing that he wants strict scrutiny because you want laws involving elections to be highly scrutinized.
4. Duct tape Sidney Powells mouth shut.
5. Ask for legal remedies that actually match what you're alleging happened.
6. Don't make a complaint with absurd allegations that you have no evidence for in the first place.
7. If you're gonna appeal, appeal on as many points as you can. Because if you appeal on one tiny point, such as that the court supposedly abused its discretion for not allowing you to amend your complaint yet again because you had no idea if you were alleging fraud or not. Then you won't be allowed to appeal on any other point either, you've essentially agreed you have no other complaint to appeal on.
8. Make arguments that are consistent with your complaint. Don't piss off the judge by thinking you can treat it like a press conference.

It is absolutely possible to do this competently. It won't work, you'll still lose. But at least you won't look as stupid.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

1. Who cares.
2. There is nothing to present.
3. Fake news.
4. See 3.
5. Such as?
6/7/8. See 2.

It is absolutely possible to do this competently.

As long as they don't get fired, it doesn't matter. They know there is no point to any of it, so why bother spell checking? As long as they get paid, they don't care. Spell checking isn't going to change the verdict. Doesn't mean they are incompetent. They just don't care.

 

[JessFR]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree.

The very idea that you're a lawyer, and representing a client, and deliberately are doing a crappy job and not following the rules of civil procedure or professional standards because "who cares, we're gonna lose they're paying us anyway" is already, in and of itself, sanctionable misconduct.

So that argument, were it true, is not convincing me these are good lawyers.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

They're following the rules, more or less, otherwise they would be penalized. There's a difference between incompetence and "sanctionable misconduct". Lawyers often phone it in, particularly lawyers appointed to people who can't afford decent representation. It's not against the law to be a shitty lawyer. I never said they were doing a commendable job, I just don't think they are laughably incompetent despite how much the MSM tries to sell me that particular narrative. I do wonder why a man like Rudy Giuliani (who pretty much everybody used to love and respect back during 9/11) would take on a case like this when he's clearly smart enough to know that it has no prospects. Then again, it always baffles me why already rich people care so much about amassing further wealth.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree.

Agree to disagree. (y)

 

[dalpat077]

Funny all this lawyer talk seems to have come up because just yesterday I decided to go to source as opposed to watching biased and opinionated crap being regurgitated wherever you look. So I spent a few hours listening (live) to the Supreme Court hearing on the plan to exclude undocumented immigrants from the Census and then watched a good few hours of the Arizona State Legislature hearing on election integrity with Mayor Rudy Giuliani (you'll note that now I'm according him some respect as opposed to just going with the flow). And I tell you: there's something seriously wrong in the state of Denmark (as the saying goes) (and no idea where that saying comes from but it matters not).

Before I continue though let me say this: I am open to criticism and correction from those that know what they're talking about (be in Constitutionally speaking or legally speaking) i.e. not being a lawyer it could be that my interpretation of what I got from the Supreme Court hearing is incorrect and I'd like to be educated and corrected if my interpretation is incorrect.

Arizona State Legislature Hearing:

I don't know how Giuliani has conducted himself in other hearings. But fuck me. He was impressive yesterday. And if anybody questions his patriotism or sanity or legal acumen, after seeing what I saw yesterday, well then there's no hope for said person(s). Just watch his opening statement and remarks (link below) if nothing else. And there was evidence presented and nothing that I'd call anecdotal or flimsy by any stretch of the imagination. And the evidence presented wasn't presented by a bunch of hacks. The first witness was a Colonel, under oath no less, and who most definitely has an in-depth knowledge on the methods that not only can, but have, been used to influence the outcome of elections using the Dominion voting system and it's affiliates and given its origins and history. And that's just to begin with. Watch his testimony as well. Sad part: in just listening to the Legislators and their questions and some of their comments I thought they were getting it. An then I find out this morning (published on various sites) that in spite of all of this they're gone ahead and certified the election results (although who the fuck knows i.e. I'm sure I'll find later somewhere today that this isn't the case). Feel free to watch the entire 10 hours and 40 minutes (I couldn't i.e. got about half way through and fell asleep unfortunately but I've seen enough).

I'm not saying that stuff like this will overturn the election. And as a matter of fact: this seems to me that this is WAY bigger than Trump and his holding onto power for dear life i.e. it's the entire system that's been fucked for years. Decades as a matter of fact. I don't think any American can honestly say that they know for a fact that they've had legitimate Presidents in office at any given time in DECADES if there's truth to all of this.

And all they were asking was for the Arizona State Legislature to hold off from certifying the vote until further investigations can been done.

One of the Legislators actually asked the Colonel what in his opinion the options were to correct all of this even going so far as to ask if going back to the in-person paper ballot system was a possible option. To my horror: turns out even that is no guarantee over there i.e. apparently just as long as you can produce ANY document (and which is not verified at the polling station) that "proves" your identity and place of residence well, then, you're able to cast your vote.

But even verifying the results, given the way the process works, would be nigh on impossible from what I gather. And given the lack of signature verification (fuck the rest) when it comes to mail in/absentee ballots there could be anywhere between a few thousand to 1.9M illegitimate votes counted in Arizona alone (just to begin with). Nobody knows. And seems to me nobody wants to know either. And for the possible reasons postulated for them not wanting to know: it mind boggling.

These people are not grasping at straws. No fucking way. If you're really interested: at least watch Mayor Giuliani's opening statement and the evidence presented by the Colonel.

Supreme Court Hearing:

I'm not going to lie and say that I understood it all. But what I took from it was that "apportionment" in based on census data and such census data INCLUDES best guess estimates of illegal or undocumented immigrants. Said "apportionment" directly relates to the number of seats allocated in Congress (I assume this means in the House and the Senate) to each state. And furthermore (and the more important) is that the number of seats is what determines the number of Electoral College Electors and the appointment of particular Electors. I don't get it. So there's millions of border jumpers that are not eligible to vote yet their numbers are taken into account in such "apportionment". And with reference to the Arizona State Legislature hearing (above) it's a stretch to believe that border jumpers don't vote given that verification of mail in/absentee ballots is all but non-existent in some instances. Best part about it: some of the lawyers involved noted that it could be that, in some cases, illegal or undocumented citizens could have been around for twenty years already and argued about the definition of what actually constitutes and illegal or undocumented citizen.

I dunno. Seems to me there's far bigger problems than Trump that need to be addressed. I think over the years you've tied yourself in knots legally speaking Not to mention having gone totally overboard when it comes to RIGHTS. Fuck. It was mentioned in the Arizona State Legislature hearing that they cannot even legally go out to verify the existence of voters without them having to hold some or the other meeting and only then will have the power to subpoena (as things currently stand they can only act if wrong doing is brought to their attention and how many people do you think are going to do that).





As I've noted before: the outcome here isn't going to change my life one iota. But fuck me am I disappointed.

And just little bit of advice: watch and listen to this type of shit and make your own mind up. Fuck YouTube and FaceBook and Twitter and all other social and mainstream (and other) media shit. Some of you, but only those really interested I guess, may well have a change of heart. Not necessarily about Trump (which, as I say, is pretty irrelevant in the bigger picture of things as things stand now).

Something stinks to high Heaven with all of this. And that statement is no longer based on Trump/Republican bias. Matter of fact and assuming that Arizona's results have indeed been certified after ALL of this: it I'm not mistaken most (if not all) of Arizona's State Legislators are Republicans! And I've said this before and as flimsy as some may want to believe that the evidence given is just that: were this evidence presented to a Grand Jury for Indictment in a criminal case for damn sure it'd be enough for a defendant to be held over for trial.

Anyway. As I noted in the beginning: if there's something that I'm not technically understanding feel free to correct and educate. And depending on what I'm wrong about: I'll apologize and conceded that I was wrong on whatever I stated as a result of my lack of education or understanding. But as far as the possibility of the outcome of this election being influenced on a biblical scale: I'll never buy it that it was not possible or didn't happen. Not after what I saw yesterday.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Giuliani is no fool.

something seriously wrong in the state of Denmark

"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark" - Marcellus, from Shakespeare's Hamlet.

 

[JessFR]

They're following the rules, more or less, otherwise they would be penalized. There's a difference between incompetence and "sanctionable misconduct". Lawyers often phone it in, particularly lawyers appointed to people who can't afford decent representation. It's not against the law to be a shitty lawyer. I never said they were doing a commendable job, I just don't think they are laughably incompetent despite how much the MSM tries to sell me that particular narrative. I do wonder why a man like Rudy Giuliani (who pretty much everybody used to love and respect back during 9/11) would take on a case like this when he's clearly smart enough to know that it has no prospects. Then again, it always baffles me why already rich people care so much about amassing further wealth.



Agree to disagree. (y)

It's not illegal to be a bad lawyer, but if you deliberately phone in your clients representation cause you know they'll lose (in the kinds of ways described above), you are opening yourself up to ethics sanctions. You won't go to jail but you could lose your license to practice law.

Not that it matters much for "lawyers" like Giuliani.

Even your shitty public defender usually will correctly spell the name of the court they're filing the documents with.

No, not every lawyer working for trumps lawsuits is incompetent. But a lot of the competent ones have left because trump makes competent representation almost impossible. And most of the lawyering we're seen is very poor.

I'm actually far from convinced that some of the lawyers involved in these cases won't actually be sanctioned by the time these lawsuits are all done. But we shall see.