No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers ***NO POLITICS
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Game on - SCOTUS to hear Texas lawsuit [Re: ] #7082232
12/10/20 05:17 AM
12/10/20 05:17 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
HobbieTrapper Offline
"Chippendale Trapper"
HobbieTrapper  Offline
"Chippendale Trapper"

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
Originally Posted by Mark June
9:50 Central and the narrative on MSM just changed. Stay tuned.....
The new narrative;
If there's blood or someone gets killed because of "Trump's fraudulent election lies, then the "blood is on Trump!"

Usually the progressive media's news precedes the news by 12 hours or so.
It's like they're prophets.




Actually, if there is blood it will be because of the appearance of impropriety on something as simple as voting and counting those votes.


-Goofy-
Re: Game on - SCOTUS to hear Texas lawsuit [Re: Bear Tracker] #7082328
12/10/20 08:47 AM
12/10/20 08:47 AM
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 479
Canada
O
Ouananiche Offline
trapper
Ouananiche  Offline
trapper
O

Joined: May 2016
Posts: 479
Canada
Originally Posted by Bear Tracker
Election law was violated. Of this there is no doubt. The question is does it rise to the level to have it turned over to the legislatures.

Not relevant.
This case has nothing to do with voter fraud.

It only seeks to prove that changes were made to election laws that were counter to constitutional law. (The changes weren't made by the appropriate branches. They were unauthorized, and thus unconstitutional).
Whether the votes were fraudulent or real does not matter here.
It only matters if the changes made to the voting criteria were unconstitutional.
If they were, and SCOTUS agrees, then the constitutional remedy is a House vote. Which would go to Trump. And that is why, this was ALWAYS his play, and why they never attempted to stop the election.

Everyone seems confused or mad, "why didn't they do anything sooner!!!! OR BEFORE THE ELECTION FRAUD HAPPENED"

Well... Look at Trump's options.

1- Let people vote, it's not a guarantee either way...
2- Play towards a House vote, where it IS guaranteed!

He's been playing to a constitutional house vote. That's where this goes if SCOTUS agrees the system changes pre-election were unconstitutional etc....

He's rolling for a Hard Eight... If SCOTUS agrees, then the House confirms him.... It's kind of a brilliant end game lol...

*Sorry for being Canadian. I like the Law.

Last edited by Ouananiche; 12/10/20 08:48 AM.
Re: Game on - SCOTUS to hear Texas lawsuit [Re: Cragar] #7082565
12/10/20 12:11 PM
12/10/20 12:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 11,136
Armpit, ak
D
Dirt Online content
trapper
Dirt  Online Content
trapper
D

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 11,136
Armpit, ak
So Trump was gambling on the judicial system? True, he was a big winner in the NFL lawsuit.


Who is John Galt?
Re: Game on - SCOTUS to hear Texas lawsuit [Re: Cragar] #7082573
12/10/20 12:24 PM
12/10/20 12:24 PM
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,742
Wisconsin
B
Bear Tracker Offline
trapper
Bear Tracker  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,742
Wisconsin
Wow, what I stated is the Texas case is about election law changes not fraud! The question legally is do the states changing election law outside of the legal procedures and procedures rise to the level to invalidate elections results in those states. I never said fraud.
This is a case about the law and legality of the changes to the parameters of the procedures.

Re: Game on - SCOTUS to hear Texas lawsuit [Re: danvee] #7082579
12/10/20 12:34 PM
12/10/20 12:34 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 1,099
KY
I
ILcooner Offline
trapper
ILcooner  Offline
trapper
I

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 1,099
KY
Originally Posted by danvee
I guess if SCOTUS turns it down they are part of the conspiracy, that's going to be bad.


you mean the justices trump appointed?

everybodys in on it now?

Re: Game on - SCOTUS to hear Texas lawsuit [Re: Cragar] #7082628
12/10/20 01:18 PM
12/10/20 01:18 PM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,974
South Dakota
R
Rat Masterson Offline
trapper
Rat Masterson  Offline
trapper
R

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,974
South Dakota
Maybe Roberts will call it a tax and it's OK. The Republicans should just order enough mail in ballots to countermand the Dems. When the voter turnout is 110% of the population will the Dems question the election or go for 120% next time.

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread