Is This Kraken a Few Tentacles Short of a Full Octopus?

"Sidney Powell 'Kraken' lawsuit dismissed in Georgia after defeat in Michigan." I haven't followed the litigation closely enough to opine on the merits, but so far it appears that the Kraken hasn't really done much against any titans.

Comments

[ravenshrike]

Here we not only see Ruby Freeman committing election fraud in one of the days running up to the election, but also nicely confirming there was ZERO chain of custody on the absentee ballots in Fulton county, thus mandating that they ALL be thrown out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx1TBzLqmf4

[Poor Yorick]

This is just the break the Trump campaign is looking for! Quick, to the Krakenmobile!!!

[Poor Yorick]

Here she comes
Here comes The Kraken
She's a demon of law
She's a demon and she's gonna be suing to overturn the election!

She's gainin' on you so you better look alive.
She's only lost every lawsuit so far, now we're at 45.

And when the odds are against her
And there's dangerous work to do
You bet your life The Kraken
Will have her suits dismissed too.

Go The Kraken
Go The Kraken
Go The Kraken, Go!

[De Oppresso Liber]

Catchy.

[Dr. Ed 2]

If I actually supported Bite Me Harass, I'd want this stuff resolved.

It's like all the Black men dying in police custody -- maybe it's legitimate but damn it, if you have nothing to hide, don't hide stuff.

[Noscitur a sociis]

"This stuff" is being resolved—generally by the Trump partisans losing in fairly embarrassing fashion, but that's still a resolution.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Read Machiavelli as to why the prince needs to be loved.

Unless they intend to send 80,000,000 Americans to the gas chamber -- and who knows, maybe they do -- they have the burden of proving that the election was fair. Legally, it's the other way around, but in terms of ability to govern, they have the burden of proof.

[Sarcastr0]

Nah, Ed. You'll grumble, but you'll be governed. Even as you declare the next general truckers strike or widespread right-wing violence is just around the corner, you'll be governed.

Because in the real world - the one outside of your keyboard - you know you've not got a lot of leverage.

[Brett Bellmore]

In the real world, we'll be governed... right up until we won't be. Remember that: When this reluctance to commit violence that the left counts on the right displaying ends, it will end suddenly.

[Sarcastr0]

It's not a 'reluctance to commit to violence' it's a constant commitment to militia fantasies.

Maybe they'll be some Oklahoma City-esque terrorism.

[Brett Bellmore]

All summer the left mostly peacefully caused over a billion dollars in damage by mostly peacefully looting and committing arson. Many urban centers will never recover from the overload of peace.

You're betting an awful lot on the right remaining nicer than the left, though I'm sure you'd never phrase it that way.

[Sarcastr0]

And yet the left remains governed.

I'd phrase it thusly: I'm betting on Americans generally not being as murderous as you rather clearly wish conservatives were.

Which is a pretty screwed up way to be, Brett. It seems you threw away anything like democracy a while ago, if that's where you're at.

Plenty of loudmouths on the right agree with you, but
1) After hearing the same rot for like 30 years, I'm pretty sure y'all are just wankers.
2) Loud online, but not a lot of you, really. Maybe enough to take over a bird sanctuary for a week or so.

[bernard11]

Brett,

When this reluctance to commit violence that the left counts on the right displaying ends

Reluctance to commit violence? WTF are you talking about? I think you should count bodies before you start claiming the right is non-violent.

Besides, what the hell is there to "resolve?" How many phony videos have to be discredited, how many Melissa Carones have to make fools of themselves, before you accept the simple fact that Trump lost?

[bernard11]

All summer the left mostly peacefully caused over a billion dollars in damage by mostly peacefully looting and committing arson.

No, Brett. "The left" did not cause the damage. Some thugs who may or may not hold left-wing views did. Mostly the demonstrators were in fact peaceful, however much you may want to deny it.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The thing to remember about OK City was that it really was just one guy.

Unlike the left which takes a committee vote to go to the bathroom, the right consists of individuals. That's why things can happen suddenly.

[Sarcastr0]

Random terrorist acts are not anything like a revolution. They're not even a kamikaze mission. They would bring about no political change except maybe the end of the alt-right.

[Sarcastr0]

I have faith in my fellow Americans that enough of them are normal and not terminally online types that are cool with political murdering.

Actually kinda sad to see you throw in with the Ed-types on that one.

[Brett Bellmore]

Look, I don't WANT to see the right emulate the left, and start routinely using violence to advance their goals. I don't WANT a mob of right-wingers to converge on Biden's inauguration and set DC on fire. I'd much prefer that the left abandon violence as a tool of politics, than that the right take it up.

But I don't see any sign that the left intends to disown and shut down Antifa/BLM. Do you? As far as I can tell, you can't even bring yourself to admit the left IS violent, let alone demand it stop.

What I'm saying is that you can't expect the current asymmetry of violence to persist. That's not how people react in the real world. If people see that violence works, eventually they get tired of being the peaceful loser, and get violent themselves. The Proud Boys are just the leading edge of what's coming. The right aren't going to let themselves be beat on every time they get together, they're going to start fighting back. And it's going to get really ugly as both sides escalate.

And you can't keep laughing off election law violations, and expect the side that lost to not think that the violations had something to do with their losing. It doesn't work like that. I've been saying that all year: You can't run an election on the honor system when people have no trust. This was NOT the year to mix things up, it was the year to follow the rules obsessively, to dot every 'i' and cross every 't', and not cut even the slightest corner.

But Democrats were absolutely determined that no election law they found inconvenient be enforced, and they got their way in too many states. Well, you reap what you sow: Now the right won't accept that they lost honestly, because it wasn't a lawfully conducted election.

Can't take that back, you do the deed, you get the consequences.

[Sarcastr0]

First, what Ed and Jimmy are talking about is not property damage.

Second, not a lot of what you're describing is a correct characterization of the Floyd protests.

Third, the Floyd protests were about a specific issue, not a general rejection of the democratic process.

Fourth, predicting 'ohhhh, it's gonna happen. And you won't like it....It's gonna happen! [it brings me no joy to predict this]' is bullshit. It does bring you joy.
You are not very good at concealing that this isn't something you hope for. You feel oppressed and wish your oppressed fellows would lash out. And it's twisted you into wanting this.

And, fifth, you've had countless commenters, conservative and liberal, explain to you that your characterization of election law violations is contrary to anything like the system we have. But it all bounces off you. Which means it's not about election law, it's something deeper. And Dumber.

[Brett Bellmore]

You see the black clad soldiers attacking people with truncheons and pepper spray? That's not SWAT, that's Antifa being mostly peaceful, in Olympia, Washington. They attacked a peaceful gathering of Trump supporters, with weapons.

You honestly expect people to put up with that, and not bring weapons themselves the next time? Are you looking forward to the US of a few years from now, when body armor and baseball bats have become the uniform of choice at political rallies, in self defense?

[bernard11]

Look, I don’t WANT to see the right emulate the left, and start routinely using violence to advance their goals. I don’t WANT a mob of right-wingers to converge on Biden’s inauguration and set DC on fire. I’d much prefer that the left abandon violence as a tool of politics, than that the right take it up.

Oh fuck you, Brett.

The right is non-violent. Right. Are you blind, or stupid?

[Brett Bellmore]

Just like I said: A billion plus dollars in property damage, multiple people hospitalized, blinding lasers deployed to cause permanent eye damage, arson of occupied buildings, and you can't bring yourself to admit the left was violent.

[Poor Yorick]

"First, far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators, including from far-left networks and individuals inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Right-wing attacks and plots account for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994, and the total number of right-wing attacks and plots has grown significantly during the past six years. Right-wing extremists perpetrated two thirds of the attacks and plots in the United States in 2019 and over 90 percent between January 1 and May 8, 2020".

[Sarcastr0]

Well you see, Poor Yorick, Brett counts property damage as violence about the same as murder, and so lumps murder in with malicious destruction of property.

[bernard11]

you can’t bring yourself to admit the left was violent.

Can you read? Or are you so deranged that you can't think?

I didn't deny there was violence. I denied that "the left" in general, as opposed to some thugs and vandals who may be leftist, was violent.

Once again you wildly overgeneralize, as though "the left" is some sort of monolithic centrally controlled (by Soros?) tight-knit organization. It's not.

And all along, while proclaiming how peaceful the right is you ignore Roof, Bowers, Sayoc, Fields (whom you actually defended). You proclaim that "the right" has no repsonsibility for McVeigh, or the would-be Whitmer kidnappers.

Fuck off, Brett. It's the right that is racking up a body count, and threatens more, unless Trump is somehow declared to be "re-elected."

[Brett Bellmore]

"Well you see, Poor Yorick, Brett counts property damage as violence about the same as murder, and so lumps murder in with malicious destruction of property."

Well, I do, actually. A billion dollars of property damage. What's the median lifetime earning in the US? $1.7 million.

That's the lifetime earnings of early 600 people, callously destroyed. How many businesses wiped out? How many people put into bankruptcy?

Lives ruined don't count if you don't end them, too? That's a pretty ruthless way to think.

[Dr. Ed 2]

This Ed is a student of human nature.

Predicting something is different from encouraging it.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And Sarcastr0, this is what the right does:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yV9H7aWgPv8&pbjreload=101

[Sarcastr0]

Ed, you are not a student of human nature. You predict right wing political violence whenever a flea sneezes in a way you don't like.

That's not pop-sociology, that's motivated reasoning based on your own hopes and dreams.

You are not really doing a great job hiding it.

[De Oppresso Liber]

"You see the black clad soldiers attacking people with truncheons and pepper spray? That’s not SWAT, that’s Antifa being mostly peaceful, in Olympia, Washington. They attacked a peaceful gathering of Trump supporters, with weapons."

Brett, you dumb motherfucker.

Watch that video again. The violence started when a trumper tackled an antifa member who was trying to light a flag on fire.

Your own example of leftist violence was actually an incident instigated by your fellow travelers. You know, the ones in fedoras and ar-15's. Fucking dorks.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yes, and it wasn't his flag that he was setting on fire, it was a flag he'd stolen from one of the Trump marchers.

Look at how those people are dressed: The Trump marchers in ordinary clothing, the Antifa show up in body armor with clubs and pepper spray. And tell me who was planning on starting a fight.

[De Oppresso Liber]

The trump cultists dressed in shitty body armor and shitty ar-15's? Well, they have a few cowboy hats instead of black hoodies, so I guess yeah, they look really peaceful.

[NonLawyerDan]

Brett, in a prior conversation someone else and I tried to ask a serious question, but I think we were too late to be noticed. So here it is: Outside of PA, is there evidence of questionable actions that could have had enough impact to overcome the differences in votes? Using PA as an example, when the PA Supreme Court extending the deadline for receiving ballots it would seem they overstepped their authority, but that surely was not influential enough to overcome 80k votes. In contrast, when the PA Supreme Court redefined “observer” so that it didn’t require being able to see what matters, that was surely BS (whether legal or not), and possibly could have been influential enough to overcome 80k votes. (Not proof that there was 80k of fraud, but as you noted, they created a situation where no one could see and report fraud.)
I haven’t been following all of this very closely — partially because my guy seems certain to be voted in by the EC — but most of what I've heard from the screaming heads is silly or wrong or misleading. But again, not paying close attention. So can you point to evidence of fraud, or of the "police" being blinded, in ways that could overcome the relevant numbers? Thanks.

[Brett Bellmore]

I can't really point to evidence of large scale fraud, because one of the problems here is that the procedures such as signature matching, or prohibitions on ballot harvesting, that would have prevented fraud were systematically defeated. Once you've broken chain of custody on ballots, the fact that you can't prove the ballots that finally arrived to be counted weren't the ones people filled out is baked in.

Ballot harvesting was 'legalized' by executive or judicial action in several states, such as Arizona.

But to some extent this is less a fight over fraud than legality.

Let's take North Carolina: They had a consent decree that was the product of collusive litigation, the AG negotiated a settlement ordering him to do what he'd wanted to do anyway: Extend the period for accepting absentee ballots to six days after the election, in violation of the state's election laws.

In Minnesota you saw exactly the same thing go down: A consent decree was used to command that the deadline for accepting absentee ballots be violated, over the objections of the state legislature. Elections officials in several areas openly violated the starting period for early voting, too.

And, of course, you saw the same thing ordered in PA by the state supreme court. The law in PA even had an explicit anti-severance clause stating that the entire law would be void if any part of it was held to be unconstitutional. The PA supreme court ignored it.

It's not a question of those ballots that got counted in defiance of state law being fraudulent, though some might have been. They were ballots that could not legally be counted.

Is illegally counting a ballot "fraud"? Maybe, maybe not. But it is "illegal". Are we not entitled to legally conducted elections?

The judiciary seems not to think so.

[NonLawyerDan]

Not expecting proof of fraud, Brett. Nor interested, for the moment, on that which is "just" illegal. Not at all saying the law doesn't matter, of course. But for now, I'm just interested in the illegal stuff that could plausibly have changed the results in the big 6 (Penn, Mich, Wisc, GA, AZ, and Nev). While I wouldn't say that there is already such proof for Penn, it's bad enough to be unsure. So I guess that is my hurdle: enough to be unsure whether or not the "true" results are themselves unsure. Anything in the other 5? (MN simply isn't close enough to matter.)

[Sarcastr0]

Brett, all of these are just you looking at a court case and saying 'nuh-uh' and declaring that counts as a thing being against the law.

Consider maybe the courts know the law better than you do.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

Man, I'm just relieved I'm not the only one who knows the theme song to 'Speed Racer' by heart.

[bacchys]

This Kraken wasn't even real squid. Just pig bunghole.

[Sebastian Cremmington]

Speaking of bungholes, apparently farting spreads Covid. So maybe that is why so many around Trump have become infected—his heavily fast food diet creates super duper spreader events through farting. Those Trump KFC farts are loud, smelly, and deadly. 😉

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Cruz will vindicate
krakenpot theories because
he's tops; just ask Gene

[ThePublius]

Neither of these court decisions addressed the merits, as you well know. We have a system where there is not a reasonable amount of time available after an election to put together a case alleging fraud.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The deluded tears
of these bigots and clingers
are entertaining

[Sidney r finkel]

What merits? Sometimes it is best to just let the judge speak. From the AJC

"Judge Timothy C. Batten dismissed the suit after a hearing arguments that lasted just over an hour Monday, citing moot arguments, lawsuit timing, and arguments filed in the wrong court.

Part of Batten’s decision included the following remarks.

“Sometimes federal judges are criticized for committing the sin of judicial activism. We call courts that have responded to that ‘enough is enough’ is right. In fact, enough is too much. And the courts have convincingly held that these types of cases are not properly before federal courts. These are state elections. State courts should evaluate these proceedings from start to finish,” Batten said.

“Moreover, the plaintiffs simply do not having standing to bring these claims,” Batten added, saying the relief Powell sought could not be ordered by the federal court.
“Additionally, I find that the plaintiffs waited too long to file this suit,” Batten said. “Their primary complaint involves the Dominion ballot marking devices. They say those machines are susceptible to fraud. There is no reason they could not have followed the administrative procedure act to the rule-making authority that had been exercised by the Secretary of State.”

“This suit could have been filed months ago at the time these machines were adopted,” Batten concluded. “Instead the plaintiffs waited until over three weeks after the election to file the suit. There’s no question in my mind that if I were to deny the motion to dismiss, the matter would be brought before the 11th Circuit, and the 11th Circuit would reverse me.”

[Dr. Ed 2]

This reminds me of Judge John Benoit, a Maine legend.

Instead of writing the ticket the way he was supposed to, with the appropriate statute being cited, a police officer nonchalantly wrote "no license."

Judge Benoit asks the teenaged defendant "do you have a hunting license?"

"Yes, your honor."

"Do you have a fishing license?"

"Yes, your honor."

"Does your dog have a license?"

"Yes, your honor."

Benoit then said: "Seems to me that you have all kinds of licenses. Case dismissed."

[bernard11]

So, as I understand it, Powell was a respected Washington lawyer before all this. Seems like a pretty good gig.

So why does she beclown herself with allegations about Hugo Chavez and whatnot?

[Sidney r finkel]

Trump Derangement Syndrome

For some reason otherwise intelligent, normal, educated and experienced people go batshit crazy when they interact with Trump. This includes Rudy, Newt, the aforementioned Sidney and a bunch of others who go beyond just arguing and put forth the lamest, most hysterical and absolutely un-intellectual arguments one could ever imagine. A future best seller is the documenting of what these people are saying, because there is just too much of it for the news of the day to cover.

[MollyGodiva]

"Safe harbor" is tomorrow. So this all ends in 25.5 hours.

[Jimmy the Dane]

No we will let you know when it ends.

[santamonica811]

Jimmy,
She was not talking about your batshit crazy and delusional and paranoid voices in your head. I agree; those will continue beyond tomorrow. Probably will go on for years.

I think Molly clearly meant "this" in reference to the attempted bullshit Trump has been trying to do with the electoral college. (I happen to disagree with her...I think "this" will actually end on the 14th, when the Electoral College officially casts their votes.)

My advice: Enjoy this last week. At least you can hang onto your magical "Something unexpected can still happen" fevered wet dreams. But, 7 days, and counting. Bwah ha ha. Mwah ha ha. Ha ha ha. (It's nice that both sides--in these past 5 years--have had the chance to gloat over the other side's defeat . . . and to also feel the sting of losing an emotionally-charged and bitterly-close election. Perspective is a wonderful thing. For people capable of learning from life's events and experiences, of course.)

[MollyGodiva]

Federal law says that all states that are certified by today are considered final. The rest of the process is an automatic formality.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Unless SCOTUS overrules the Federal law.
See: https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-texas-files-lawsuit-against-4-states-at-supreme-court-over-election-rules

[Dr. Ed 2]

Jimmy, you kinda know that Bite Me Harass are going to be impeached, don't you?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Counting your Georgia bigots before they're hatched, clingers?

You don't get to be a Trump fan with sound judgment, strong character, solid education, sensible conduct, and reliance on reason.

[Zarniwoop]

Impeached for what? Living in your head without paying rent?

[bernard11]

Guess what, Jimmy. We're not interested in your opinion of "when it ends." It carries no weight whatsoever.

[Sarcastr0]

The real Kraken was the friends we made along the way.

[De Oppresso Liber]

I just want more of Rudy farting on mic and letting his hair melt down his face.

[Dr. Ed 2]

You ableist schmuck.

What if he was in a wheelchair -- would you attack him for that?

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

No, only if he had arthrogryposis.

[Aunt Teefah]

Gotta call people out for these sorts of microaggressions.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

That word doesn't mean what you clearly think it means.

Look at all the idiot Trump supporters suddenly caring about decorum.

What was it you had to say when Trump attacked a crippled reporter? What about his unending misogynistic statements? Racial baiting? Fucking hypocrites.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Jason, I even know what the word means in Switzerland. And supporting Trump doesn't mean I approve of his New York personality.

But the best summary of the fake news item you cite is "why would Trump imitate a man who has difficulty moving at least one of his limbs by madly thrashing his own?"

Think about that logically for a minute...

https://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/fake-news-trump-did-not-mock-disabled-reporter-and-other-lies-from-the-left/

[Jason Cavanaugh]

The video evidence of his mockery speaks for itself Ed. Show me where he did an impression of anyone else in that manner.

https://youtu.be/PX9reO3QnUA?t=16

Better yet, just go fuck yourself right off of this planet and leave the rest of us with one less dipshit to tolerate.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And you wonder why people like me are saying that the middle shall cease to hold.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

You can't address the issues, or reality, so who gives a shit what you think or say?

You are irrelevant in every sense of the word.

[AtR]

And here I thought that we had left 7th grade behind ...

[Jimmy the Dane]

Na, liberals think this is literally a joke, a game. We will see who is laughing when it starts...

[Sarcastr0]

Right wing sulking always involves a bit of a threat of future violence.

I think it's a leftover from when they lost the Civil War.

[Dr. Ed 2]

If the Civil War had been fought at any time other than 1850-1870, the Confederacy would have won. Just sayin....

[Leo Marvin]

Well, Ed, as your tangerine god-king said yesterday, you're all victims. You're a victim. Jimmy's a victim. Brett's a victim. And Bob E. Lee's poor, long-suffering rebs may be the most done wrongest victims of all.

[Brett Bellmore]

Eh, I kind of doubt that's true. Industrialization was fueling the North's economy, it's why they won the Civil war, and it wasn't going to go away. They just flat out had a logistical advantage, and it was growing all the time.

That's why the South wanted out, after all. They could see the writing on the wall.

[loki13]

"That’s why the South wanted out, after all. They could see the writing on the wall."

No, Brett. The South wanted out because they were bunch of racist traitors that wanted to keep on owning people.

Black people.

And then, after the war, a large number of them came up with the whole "Lost Cause" bs so that idiots (like you and the others on this thread) would try to... whitewash history.

How apt.

[Brett Bellmore]

What exactly did you think they saw written on the wall, anyway? Don't leap to pretend we're disagreeing.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Brett -- Had the Civil War been fought in 1820, when it almost was, the North wouldn't have the advantage of industrialization.

Conversely, by 1890, Irish immigrants had achieved political power which they lacked in 1860, and instead of draft riots in NYC, there'd have been effective political opposition to the draft. It wouldn't have just been the Copperheads, the war would have ended pretty much the way Vietnam did -- with Congress shutting off the money.

Remember too that railroads were starting to be built in the south before the war, and a lot of them were half-finished when the war broke out. Throw that in that and the much more effective shore-based artillery circa 1890 and I doubt that the blockade would have been as effective.

[BrotherMovesOn]

This kind of historical analysis certainly puts Gordon Wood to shame.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

All-talk clingers are my favorite culture war casualties . . . although White, male misfit professors who enjoy lathering bigots and autists are certainly competitive.

------

Will Senator Cruz,
the proprietor's hero,
save the day today?

[Aunt Teefah]

The reason people think it's a joke is because it's funny. Rudy's antics, for whatever else might be said about them, are legitimately entertaining. And the fact that you right wing cranks are getting so mad about it makes it funnier still.

[De Oppresso Liber]

I did too. Yet here we, waiting for an emotional toddler and his little clique to tantrum themselves out.

At least we can laugh at their buffoonish behavior while we wait.

[Jimmy the Dane]

It is a lot easier act like an immature sixth grade student than it is to take adult stuff seriously and give it the proper amount of attention.

For those who want to act more like an adult who lives in a free society then child, take a look at the various pleadings and other evidence cited. I don't know if there is actually anything there, but damn the accusations are pretty comprehensive.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Obviously there isn't anything there, because they've been thrown out repeatedly and consistently.

The accusations are comprehensively non-credible.

When there's 'adult-stuff' to be dealt with, you'll certainly be told.

[Jimmy the Dane]

And you just reinforced my point. Thanks.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Your first failure is thinking that you ever had a point.

[apedad]

HA!

[Dr. Ed 2]

Jason, in the real world people understand that being found not guilty on a procedural basis doesn't mean you didn't do it.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Nobody in the Trump cult has authority to speak about the 'real world.'

Delusional twits.

[De Oppresso Liber]

Or 'not guilty'.

[loki13]

"Besides, even if it fails and Biden raises his right hand….it’s already won in the court of public opinion."

What's interesting is that Mad Kalak, despite being completely wrong about almost everything, is right here- but for the wrong reasons.

Trump's claims are baseless, as anyone who follows this knows. (And I mean, actually follows it, not some kind of Jimmy the Dane "If you read the allegations that I haven't, you'd think that there a lot of accusations, so that must mean something? Because I'm an idiot?").

Moreover, anyone with a shred of decency (which does not describe Trump or his ardent supporters) would be concerned that Trump has now engaged on a scorched-earth effort to simply have different states declare him the winner. It's funny ... because it's not working. But it's also deeply, deeply scary that we are both at this point, and that the GOP is still trying to deal with this sub silentio (that's just Trump being Trump ... let him have his tantrum).

But as MK correctly points out, this is about public opinion; not most people, but the morons. The ones like Brett, and Jimmy (you don't need to count Dr Ed- he's busy hunting down the latest QAnon-approved conspiracy no matter what). This is about making sure that enough Republicans are swearing fealty to Trump- that they go on the record to say, "Oh, Mr. Trump, I can totally see your clothes!"

This is the full makeover of the GOP into the party of Trump. A party obsessed with fifth columns (RINOs, people that believe elections are run correctly) and being stabbed in the back. A party that doesn't have any real policy positions other than "Trump good, Democrats bad."

There is a fine line between farce and tragedy.

[Zarniwoop]

“You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know… morons.”

[Sarcastr0]

Yeah, it's criminally undercovered that Trump has called 3 states' GOP leadership to pressure them to throw the election to him.

That's indefensible.

[loki13]

You'd think that Josh Blackman could spare one of his 38 daily blog posts about that topic ...

HA! Who am I kidding? There is some hypothetical Democratic plot that will probably influence Justice Roberts for him to blog about.

[Josh R]

I suspect most elected Republicans were hoping to ditch Trump. But for the reasons detailed by loki, they can't. At least not yet.

If Trump doesn't run in 2024, how much influence will Trump have on the party? Will the nominee have to kiss Trump's ring? Or perhaps no matter who the nominee is, the new members of the base will not go for anyone except Trump.

[ReaderY]

In the Georgia “kracken” case, Lin Wood actually got relief in the district court, a temporary restraining order freezing voting machines in three large Democratic-leaning counties.

And the mn proceeded to appeal his own victory.

The effect was delay - canceling the evidentiary hearing that had been scheduled in the district court, while leaving the restraining order in place.

If all one wants is the restraining order, it might be an effective strategy. Perhaps Lin Wood hoped to engage in legal manouvres that manage to extend the restraining order until the runoff election, taking the voting machines of major Democratic-leaning counties out of the election, while somehow avoiding an evidentiary hearing in which the paucity of evidence would be exposed.

https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/files/202014480.pdf

[loki13]

"If all one wants is the restraining order, it might be an effective strategy. Perhaps Lin Wood hoped to engage in legal manouvres that manage to extend the restraining order until the runoff election"

So, about Lin Wood ....he was a good trial attorney. Apparently, he has been having some mental health issues recently. According to the lawsuit filed by his formed colleagues.

[David Nieporent]

So, about Lin Wood ….he was a good trial attorney.

Was he? He was a prominent trial attorney.

[M L]

I predicted from the start that there would be no possibility of proving any sort of election fraud at a sufficiently widespread level.

However, I don't believe our election systems and voting systems are reasonably secure. That's manifestly untrue. You have to be a willfully blind fool to think that we have truly secure elections that actually protect the integrity of the vote. As to just how bad it is, I'm open to evidence and it varies by state.

[Zarniwoop]

Of the many problems that “racial integration” cases were trying to overcome, complete and utter lack of evidence was not one of them.

And it’s not as if Brown v. Board of Ed. was a sudden lightning strike of clarity. The NAACP pursued an organized, coherent, and effective strategy for 20+ years to get to that case. See, e.g., State of Missouri ex rel. Gaines v. Canada (1938) and, more generally, Thurgood Marshall’s involvement starting around 1935.

[bernard11]

it’s already won in the court of public opinion

Only when the jury is made up of gullible Trumpist fools.

[Sarcastr0]

The difference is that civil rights cases are about a change in the underlying jurisprudence. The facts are not in dispute.

These cases are stalled because they have no factual basis. You're mixing up facts and law.

This is not a judicial crusade, just a farce.

[loki13]

That is not true.

None of it. You don't know what the complaints allege, you don't know what the law is, and you don't know what the orders say.

Other than that, you're batting 1.000.

[Sarcastr0]

the court cases are merely asking courts to apply existing law as written, which they are declining to do

This is the usual crap someone who loses in court says.

Except, once again, these cases don't even get to the asking stage because their factual underpinning turns out to be nonexistent.

Much like your comments here.
You quite clearly haven't actually looked at even a single opinion, and are getting your takes from some dumbass blog at best.

[loki13]

When did you stop beating your wife, Mad?

Sorry, I forgot how deep down the rabbit hole you are.

When did you stop molesting children in service of Satan, Mad?

[loki13]

You are so far gone, you don't even know it.

Just get out of your own feed, or whatever you think is giving you "news" and try to think about it. If someone's own appointed people who control the DOJ and election security don't agree with you ... when the judges you appointed are saying that your claims are full of it ...

Then who is lying? I mean, you completely trust Trump, obviously. Does Trump have a history of lying? Of bringing frivolous lawsuits?

I can't even.

[loki13]

Nope. You haven't. And I know you haven't followed it more closely than I have.

Because I know you don't know more about the law in general, or election law. And I know you haven't read the primary documents (or understood them).

Therefore, I know that you're full of it. Thanks for playing, though.

[loki13]

Let's go through this again. Why don't you do the following. Instead of regurgitating the generic complaints that have repeatedly been shot down (such as the one about GOP election observers being thrown out, which was not true, when in court they had to acknowledge ... ahem, a "non-zero" number of observers were there), you point to the specific evidence that was alleged in a specific complaint (verified, or with a credible affidavit) and why, as a matter of law, it matters.

Protip- asserting "feels" (such as 'someone was making me uncomfortable') is not an election violation. Process violations (such as 'we had 100 observers in the room, but wanted 101') is not sufficient.

Go on. Instead of making ME disprove your ridiculous conspiracies, why don't you point me to the smoking gun of why the whole election is wrong, and which allegation and legal theory you are using.

I'll await a response.

[loki13]

You've been repeating the same tired points that you've been fed that were discredited weeks ago.

You don't even understand how stupid you are.

So, thanks?

[loki13]

I can't even is how I feel, because I honestly don't know how to deal with someone like you.

It's like Brett, who has now retreated to the point of arguing that the election is wrong because ... following what a court says is wrong.

Why bother, Mad? You keep regurgitating the same tired crud. If you actually went and looked yourself, you'd know it was wrong. But you don't want to.

You don't need me, or anyone else. You can find this all out yourself. But you're not going to.

[loki13]

The worst thing is, it never ends.

Was it Mad, or Dr. Ed, or Jimmy that posted that video a week or two back that had the PROOF of a postal worker ripping up ballots? The one going around all the right-wing sites?

That was, of course, a total fake?

It just keeps happening. The fakes, and the lies, keep propagating faster than they can be shot down. Look at Mad Kalak- he is still caught up in the "windwos covered, observers kicked out" - that is something that was known to be a lie weeks ago!

...but it keeps getting trotted out. Over and over again. Ugh.

[loki13]

And bless your cotton socks!

[loki13]

You're going to have to be more specific, Mad.

As much fun as this is, there are multiple hoax videos and articles being circulated every single day. I can't keep up with them all. The last "big" one I heard about was the Dominion one (also BS).

So please point me to a legal pleading articulating this. Something I can verify. Not a BS right-wing conspiracy site.

[loki13]

Dang it.

It took 10 seconds to google once I looked.

So this was already dealt with by the Georgia Secretary of State on Monday. The REPUBLICAN.

Feel free to watch his news conference. But yes, it's more hoax material being sent around. It's really tiring, but you need to not be so gullible, Mad.

[loki13]

So .... your retreat from reality is the Democrat's fault?

Who knew they were so powerful?

[loki13]

No.

Sometimes, things happen.

A historically unpopular incumbent, during a poorly-handled pandemic, is not elected. The fact that it was even reasonably close speaks volumes regarding both the partisan lean of the electoral college (as opposed to the popular vote) and how divided the country is on partisan lines. But no, the vote outcome should not be surprising ... to anyone.

Again, person expected to lose, loses, even while outperforming expectations. This isn't breaking news.

Moreover, this is the incumbent. If he was truly concerned about electoral integrity, he had four years to do something about it. This isn't about electoral integrity.

There is a worrying strain of conspiracy theory in your thought. Are you asking me, "Do you think that the election was 100% perfect, everywhere?" Of course not. It's run by people. People make mistakes. But if you have ever participated in our elections (as I have) on a regular basis, the surprising thing is how amazing and awesome the people are. Whether it's boy scout troops helping to bring ballots in, or senior citizens assisting first-time voters, we should be proud of our elections in this country.

You, and Trump, are turning something that every American should be proud of into a laughing stock. For no reason other than Trump's ego. And that's not right. I hope that some day you will recognize this, but I'm not holding my breath.

I really wish you'd try and learn these things yourself, and not depend on those media sources that are obviously letting you down.

[Josh R]

If facts mattered to you, you would have realized long ago that there is no evidence "that things are kinds [sic] suspect here" to anywhere near the point of changing the outcome of the election.

[loki13]

Yes, you are engaged in motivated reasoning.

Seriously.

[Sarcastr0]

m_k, your complete lack of actual facts about the 2020 election is unsurprising.

You understanding of what the electoral college does and is intended to do is amazingly wrong. Like, it takes work to be that misinformed and read the VC.

[Sarcastr0]

That was Sam, as I recall. He's not been here for a while.

The thing is, it's not actually something they believe. They're sincere now, but it's not deep.
Like, there will be whingeing after the election, like birthers after Obama in 2008. And then it'll go away for years in favor of the next right-wing ridiculous push, probably involving either religious exemptions or sabre-rattling at China. And then it'll bubble back up again and they'll declare they were always thinking about it.

[Brett Bellmore]

Because courts are supposed to enforce the law, not order it violated.

[loki13]

How many times have people told you this, Brett?

There are two issues with what you keep asserting incorrectly.

1. You assert that you are right about the law, and the Courts aren't. That is, at best, a dubious proposition. Most people tend to trust judges more than Brett Bellmore.

2. Even if a court is wrong, it is still correct to follow the court. Let's say that your state still has a flag burning statute. And let's say that it's not enforced because SCOTUS has said enforcing it is unconstitutional. Even if that is wrong (and gets changed later), it's still correct to follow the law, Brett.

None of this is rocket science, and quite frankly it's bizarre that people have to keep explaining this to you.

[Sarcastr0]

You also don't know what ad hominems are.

Impressive.

The EC was intended to be a brief, ad-hoc elected elite to make independent decisions on who would be President.

That lasted almost no time at all in the post-Washington era with the rise of political parties, and since 1804 it's been the exact rubber stamp you claim it isn't.

[Sarcastr0]

So under the law currently in effect, the law that's been around for a century, it's a rubber stamp.
You may want to take that up with m_k from earlier this morning.

I'd argue that law instantiated an existing process, but feel free to quibble about that, since it seems we both agree about the current state of both law and practice, and how it has nothing to do with relitigating the election.

[loki13]

Just to reiterate, Mad, because it's amusing.

You keep referring to things everyone else has long since realized was false.

Then you bring up something that the GOP Secretary of State refuted, but because of more conspiratorial claims, refuse to believe it. Because .... reasons.

And you know that the author (Mollie Hemmingway) has already been repeatedly pwned by people that know what they are talking about. Because she's not an attorney, and has no knowledge of any of these issues.

It's just whac-a-mole.

[Sarcastr0]

Questioning the premise of an election with your facts being this shoddy is just hating democracy because it didn't go your way.

It's not 'forget it move along' there is nothing to forget; there is nothing to call the election into question.
You're making a fool of yourself attacking an election armed with nothing but your lack of dignity.