• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

2020 Election Results

Just read Gohmert's lawsuit has been dismissed.

No standing. What a let down. I wish the judge had called out his crazy.

I've been waiting for the day when a court will issue a ruling that says something like: "No...just...fucking no. Do you even understand how this works? No? Please stop doing this. Sorry, I should be more formal. Um...plaintiffs have no idea what the fuck they're doing, and petition is denied because....ah shit I already lost it. Stop. Or I'm going to sanction your dumb ass."


This is my dream.
 
Lawsuit Arguing Pence Can Choose Trump Electors Tossed Out By Judge : NPR
A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit that challenges President-elect Joe Biden's victory, as Congress moves toward finalizing the results of the 2020 election.

The January certification of states' electoral votes, overseen by the vice president, is usually considered a formality. But a lawsuit filed last week by Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, seeks to upend the process.

In some key battleground states, groups of Republicans have baselessly declared themselves to be "alternate electors," claiming to represent the true wishes of the voters. Gohmert and the other plaintiffs — including a group of self-proclaimed electors from Arizona — argue that when confronted with competing slates of electors, the Constitution gives Vice President Mike Pence the power to choose which electors to certify.

The legal challenge, which reflected the longstanding refusal of certain Republicans to acknowledge Biden's victory, was widely seen as a long shot. Now, Jeremy Kernodle in Texas has ruled that the plaintiffs don't have standing to sue. He says they haven't met the requirement that they show they've been injured by the defendant and that the relief they ask for would redress that injury.
How many times will Trump have to be slapped down?
 
January 6 protests in Washington grow as Trump calls supporters to D.C. - The Washington Post
Four seemingly competing rallies to demand that Congress overturn the results of the presidential election, which their participants falsely view as illegitimate, are scheduled on the day Congress is set to convene to certify electoral college votes, declaring President-elect Joe Biden the winner.

The events will be headlined by Trump’s most ardent supporters, including recently pardoned George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during its Russia investigation, and longtime ally Roger Stone, whose sentence for seeking to impede a congressional probe into Russian election interference was commuted by Trump in July before being upgraded to a full pardon.

...
Threats of violence, ploys to smuggle guns into the District and calls to set up an “armed encampment” on the Mall have proliferated in online chats about the Jan. 6 day of protest. The Proud Boys, members of armed right-wing groups, conspiracy theorists and white supremacists have pledged to attend.
No wonder right-wingers get worked up about Antifa -- it's pure projection.

Donald J. Trump on Twitter: "The BIG Protest Rally in Washington, D.C., will take place at 11.00 A.M. on January 6th. Locational details to follow. StopTheSteal!" / Twitter
 
Lawsuit Arguing Pence Can Choose Trump Electors Tossed Out By Judge : NPR
A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit that challenges President-elect Joe Biden's victory, as Congress moves toward finalizing the results of the 2020 election.

The January certification of states' electoral votes, overseen by the vice president, is usually considered a formality. But a lawsuit filed last week by Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, seeks to upend the process.

In some key battleground states, groups of Republicans have baselessly declared themselves to be "alternate electors," claiming to represent the true wishes of the voters. Gohmert and the other plaintiffs — including a group of self-proclaimed electors from Arizona — argue that when confronted with competing slates of electors, the Constitution gives Vice President Mike Pence the power to choose which electors to certify.

The legal challenge, which reflected the longstanding refusal of certain Republicans to acknowledge Biden's victory, was widely seen as a long shot. Now, Jeremy Kernodle in Texas has ruled that the plaintiffs don't have standing to sue. He says they haven't met the requirement that they show they've been injured by the defendant and that the relief they ask for would redress that injury.
How many times will Trump have to be slapped down?

Gohmert says there's no recourse but street violence.
 
Lawsuit Arguing Pence Can Choose Trump Electors Tossed Out By Judge : NPR
A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit that challenges President-elect Joe Biden's victory, as Congress moves toward finalizing the results of the 2020 election.

The January certification of states' electoral votes, overseen by the vice president, is usually considered a formality. But a lawsuit filed last week by Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, seeks to upend the process.

In some key battleground states, groups of Republicans have baselessly declared themselves to be "alternate electors," claiming to represent the true wishes of the voters. Gohmert and the other plaintiffs — including a group of self-proclaimed electors from Arizona — argue that when confronted with competing slates of electors, the Constitution gives Vice President Mike Pence the power to choose which electors to certify.

The legal challenge, which reflected the longstanding refusal of certain Republicans to acknowledge Biden's victory, was widely seen as a long shot. Now, Jeremy Kernodle in Texas has ruled that the plaintiffs don't have standing to sue. He says they haven't met the requirement that they show they've been injured by the defendant and that the relief they ask for would redress that injury.
How many times will Trump have to be slapped down?

Gohmert says there's no recourse but street violence.

Gohmert is a clown. Even the GOP considers him a clown.
 
Lawsuit Arguing Pence Can Choose Trump Electors Tossed Out By Judge : NPR
A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit that challenges President-elect Joe Biden's victory, as Congress moves toward finalizing the results of the 2020 election.

The January certification of states' electoral votes, overseen by the vice president, is usually considered a formality. But a lawsuit filed last week by Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, seeks to upend the process.

In some key battleground states, groups of Republicans have baselessly declared themselves to be "alternate electors," claiming to represent the true wishes of the voters. Gohmert and the other plaintiffs — including a group of self-proclaimed electors from Arizona — argue that when confronted with competing slates of electors, the Constitution gives Vice President Mike Pence the power to choose which electors to certify.

The legal challenge, which reflected the longstanding refusal of certain Republicans to acknowledge Biden's victory, was widely seen as a long shot. Now, Jeremy Kernodle in Texas has ruled that the plaintiffs don't have standing to sue. He says they haven't met the requirement that they show they've been injured by the defendant and that the relief they ask for would redress that injury.
How many times will Trump have to be slapped down?

Gohmert says there's no recourse but street violence.

Inciting sedition is a crime.
 
Ghomert is far from alone. The GOP is a big clown car party.

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1345423296544829441?s=20[/TWEET]
 
Ghomert is far from alone. The GOP is a big clown car party.

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1345423296544829441?s=20[/TWEET]

And if there were any actual proof of the claimed "widespread voter fraud," it would be more than 11. It would be all of them. All Republican Senators. All Republican Representatives. All Republican Governors and state legislators.

If they had rock-solid proof that the Democrats had conspired with Dominion, the ghost of Hugo Chavez, George Soros, and (fill in the blank here) to "steal" the election, then they could end the Democratic Party in one fell swoop. They'd not only win all the court cases and have Donald Trump as President for another four years, but any candidate with a (D) next to their name for at least the next generation would be a non-starter. Democrats would go the way of the Whigs, and the GOP would have a majority across all levels of government until a new opposition party (with no ties to the election-stealers) got up to speed.

That they're not all in on this effort tells you all you need to know about the validity of the "widespread voter fraud" claims.
 
Here is those politicians' statement:
Joint Statement from Senators Cruz, Johnson, Lankford, Daines, Kennedy, Blackburn, Braun, Senators-Elect Lummis, Marshall, Hagerty, Tuberville

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), John Kennedy (R-La.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), and Mike Braun (R-Ind.), and Senators-Elect Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall (R-Kany, Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) issued the following statement in advance of the Electoral College certification process on January 6, 2021:

"America is a Republic whose leaders are chosen in democratic elections. Those elections, in turn. must comply with the Constitution and with federal and state law.

"When the voters fairly decide an election, pursuant to the rule of law, the losing candidate should acknowledge and respect the legitimacy of that election. And. if the voters choose to elect a new office-holder, our Nation should have a peaceful transfer of power.

"The election of 2020, like the election of 2016, was hard fought and, in many swing states, narrowly decided. The 2020 election, however, featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.

"Voter fraud has posed a persistent challenge in our elections, although its breadth and scope are disputed. any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.

"And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread. Reuters/Ipsos polling, tragically, shows that 39% of Americans believe 'the election was rigged.' That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%).

"Some Members of Congress disagree with that assessment, as do many members of the media.

"But, whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations.

"Ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud. Twice, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to do so; twice, the Court declined.

"On January 6, it is incumbent on Congress to vote on whether to certify the 2020 election results. That vote is the is lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud.

"At that quadrennial joint session, there is long precedent of Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001. 2005, and 2017. And. in both 1969 and 2005. a Democratic Senator joined with Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.

"The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states -- Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina -- were alleged to have been conducted illegally.

"In 1877. Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission -- consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices -- to consider and resolve the disputed returns.

"We should follow that precedent. To wit, Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission's findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote. if needed.

"Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not 'regularly given' and 'lawfully certified' (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.

'We are not naive. We fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise. But support felection integrity should nor be a partisan issue. A fair and credible audit -- conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20 -- would dramatically improve Americans' faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People.

"These are matters worthy of the Congress, and entrusted to us to defend. We do not take this action lightly. We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our In Democracy."
 
The Seditious 11 said:
"And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread. Reuters/Ipsos polling, tragically, shows that 39% of Americans believe 'the election was rigged.' That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%).

They keep playing this mendacious canard. As if GOP public sentiment is unrelated to what GOP leaders are saying, just a complete coincidence.

And has there ever been a bigger cuck than Ted "say anything you like about my wife" Cruz?
 
Here is those politicians' statement:
Joint Statement from Senators Cruz, Johnson, Lankford, Daines, Kennedy, Blackburn, Braun, Senators-Elect Lummis, Marshall, Hagerty, Tuberville

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), John Kennedy (R-La.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), and Mike Braun (R-Ind.), and Senators-Elect Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall (R-Kany, Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) issued the following statement in advance of the Electoral College certification process on January 6, 2021:

"America is a Republic whose leaders are chosen in democratic elections. Those elections, in turn. must comply with the Constitution and with federal and state law.

"When the voters fairly decide an election, pursuant to the rule of law, the losing candidate should acknowledge and respect the legitimacy of that election. And. if the voters choose to elect a new office-holder, our Nation should have a peaceful transfer of power.

"The election of 2020, like the election of 2016, was hard fought and, in many swing states, narrowly decided. The 2020 election, however, featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.

"Voter fraud has posed a persistent challenge in our elections, although its breadth and scope are disputed. any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.

"And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread. Reuters/Ipsos polling, tragically, shows that 39% of Americans believe 'the election was rigged.' That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%).

"Some Members of Congress disagree with that assessment, as do many members of the media.

"But, whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations.

"Ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud. Twice, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to do so; twice, the Court declined.

"On January 6, it is incumbent on Congress to vote on whether to certify the 2020 election results. That vote is the is lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud.

"At that quadrennial joint session, there is long precedent of Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001. 2005, and 2017. And. in both 1969 and 2005. a Democratic Senator joined with Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.

"The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states -- Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina -- were alleged to have been conducted illegally.

"In 1877. Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission -- consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices -- to consider and resolve the disputed returns.

"We should follow that precedent. To wit, Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission's findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote. if needed.

"Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not 'regularly given' and 'lawfully certified' (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.

'We are not naive. We fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise. But support felection integrity should nor be a partisan issue. A fair and credible audit -- conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20 -- would dramatically improve Americans' faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People.

"These are matters worthy of the Congress, and entrusted to us to defend. We do not take this action lightly. We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our In Democracy."

Yet every aspect of every claim made above has be shown to have no merit by every court that these self-righteous gentlemen and their allies has attempted suit to consider.

It's the height of arrogance for these people to use measures taken by states to assure voters could vote under extreme conditions of pandemic as reason to not consider votes fairly made. The fraud is with those who would deny legislated and fairly executed voting processes. Every measure of democratic processes were openly and fairly legislated. Vote collections and counting were IAC with norms throughout the nation. It is not our problem that one party choses to suppress voters. Nor is it the nation that should suffer if votes not so suppressed are counted.
 
Here is those politicians' statement:
Joint Statement from Senators Cruz, Johnson, Lankford, Daines, Kennedy, Blackburn, Braun, Senators-Elect Lummis, Marshall, Hagerty, Tuberville

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), John Kennedy (R-La.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), and Mike Braun (R-Ind.), and Senators-Elect Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall (R-Kany, Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), and Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) issued the following statement in advance of the Electoral College certification process on January 6, 2021:

"America is a Republic whose leaders are chosen in democratic elections. Those elections, in turn. must comply with the Constitution and with federal and state law.

"When the voters fairly decide an election, pursuant to the rule of law, the losing candidate should acknowledge and respect the legitimacy of that election. And. if the voters choose to elect a new office-holder, our Nation should have a peaceful transfer of power.

"The election of 2020, like the election of 2016, was hard fought and, in many swing states, narrowly decided. The 2020 election, however, featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.

"Voter fraud has posed a persistent challenge in our elections, although its breadth and scope are disputed. any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.

"And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread. Reuters/Ipsos polling, tragically, shows that 39% of Americans believe 'the election was rigged.' That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%).

"Some Members of Congress disagree with that assessment, as do many members of the media.

"But, whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations.

"Ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud. Twice, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to do so; twice, the Court declined.

"On January 6, it is incumbent on Congress to vote on whether to certify the 2020 election results. That vote is the is lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud.

"At that quadrennial joint session, there is long precedent of Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001. 2005, and 2017. And. in both 1969 and 2005. a Democratic Senator joined with Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.

"The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states -- Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina -- were alleged to have been conducted illegally.

"In 1877. Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission -- consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices -- to consider and resolve the disputed returns.

"We should follow that precedent. To wit, Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission's findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote. if needed.

"Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not 'regularly given' and 'lawfully certified' (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.

'We are not naive. We fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise. But support felection integrity should nor be a partisan issue. A fair and credible audit -- conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20 -- would dramatically improve Americans' faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People.

"These are matters worthy of the Congress, and entrusted to us to defend. We do not take this action lightly. We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our In Democracy."

Yet every aspect of every claim made above has be shown to have no merit by every court that these self-righteous gentlemen and their allies has attempted suit to consider.

It's the height of arrogance for these people to use measures taken by states to assure voters could vote under extreme conditions of pandemic as reason to not consider votes fairly made. The fraud is with those who would deny legislated and fairly executed voting processes. Every measure of democratic processes were openly and fairly legislated. Vote collections and counting were IAC with norms throughout the nation. It is not our problem that one party choses to suppress voters. Nor is it the nation that should suffer if votes not so suppressed are counted.

Wut? Did you feel the same why when Democrats did the same to the Republican president-elects? It's not going to change the outcome; but the media is hyping it more this year than prior elections. Shocking.
 
Yet every aspect of every claim made above has be shown to have no merit by every court that these self-righteous gentlemen and their allies has attempted suit to consider.

It's the height of arrogance for these people to use measures taken by states to assure voters could vote under extreme conditions of pandemic as reason to not consider votes fairly made. The fraud is with those who would deny legislated and fairly executed voting processes. Every measure of democratic processes were openly and fairly legislated. Vote collections and counting were IAC with norms throughout the nation. It is not our problem that one party choses to suppress voters. Nor is it the nation that should suffer if votes not so suppressed are counted.

Wut? Did you feel the same why when Democrats did the same to the Republican president-elects? It's not going to change the outcome; but the media is hyping it more this year than prior elections. Shocking.

Remind me, which year was it that elected Democrat congressmen and senators were still questioning the legitimacy of the Republican president elect in January?

Perhaps you could include some links to news reports about the court cases they were bringing, and their statements of intent to challenge electors.

Or perhaps you could take your Tu Quoque fallacy and shove it.
 
Wut? Did you feel the same why when Democrats did the same to the Republican president-elects? It's not going to change the outcome; but the media is hyping it more this year than prior elections. Shocking.

I can always depend on you to Moore/Coulter an argument. To spell out the patently fucking obvious no prominent Democrat has endorsed bullshit conspiracies uttered next door to a dildo shop involving a dead world leader after the votes have been counted. There has been nothing even remotely equivalent in intensity or stupidity that Trumptards are currently peddling.
 
Well Senator  Barbara Boxer and Representative Stephanie Tubbs did object to Bush vote in Ohio in 2005

Boxer No comparison:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ba...son-2004-electoral-college-objection-hawleyss
"There’s no comparison to what Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones and I did in ’05," Boxer told CNN. "Number one, John Kerry had conceded the race. We have a president here who’s orchestrating kind of an overthrow of the election. Secondly, we said up front we had no interest in overturning the election. All we wanted was to focus on voter suppression that we saw in Ohio."
 
Yet every aspect of every claim made above has be shown to have no merit by every court that these self-righteous gentlemen and their allies has attempted suit to consider.

It's the height of arrogance for these people to use measures taken by states to assure voters could vote under extreme conditions of pandemic as reason to not consider votes fairly made. The fraud is with those who would deny legislated and fairly executed voting processes. Every measure of democratic processes were openly and fairly legislated. Vote collections and counting were IAC with norms throughout the nation. It is not our problem that one party choses to suppress voters. Nor is it the nation that should suffer if votes not so suppressed are counted.

Wut? Did you feel the same why when Democrats did the same to the Republican president-elects? It's not going to change the outcome; but the media is hyping it more this year than prior elections. Shocking.

Remind me, which year was it that elected Democrat congressmen and senators were still questioning the legitimacy of the Republican president elect in January?

Perhaps you could include some links to news reports about the court cases they were bringing, and their statements of intent to challenge electors.

Or perhaps you could take your Tu Quoque fallacy and shove it.

Rhetorical much? Trausti may take a stab at responding in substance but only if he can pull himself away from the mirror and his naked reflection.
 
Back
Top Bottom