pcosmar
Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 54,940
What new evidence?
Corrupt Judges throwing out cases without even looking at the evidence,,get a trip up to a SUPERIOR court.
And I would like to see the Military Option set aside,
BREAKING : Attorney Sidney Powell will be disclosing MASSIVE EVIDENCE within 10 days !!!!!!
- Thread starter Contumacious
- Start date
What new evidence?
Corrupt Judges throwing out cases without even looking at the evidence,,get a trip up to a SUPERIOR court.
And I would like to see the Military Option set aside,
TER
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 17,946
As would we all. The military option is the option of last resort.
Unfortunately, we are nearing that point very quickly where it becomes the only resort. That is, if we want to keep the Republic like Franklin once said.
TheCount
Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2014
- Messages
- 11,748
What evidence are they throwing aside?
Also, appellate and state supreme courts have yeeted those same garbage cases so you can't pretend like it's just the district court judges. Or is it your opinion that, mysteriously, the true test of a judge's corruption is whether they agree with you?
dannno
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Messages
- 65,717
pcosmar
Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2007
- Messages
- 54,940
As far as I can tell they have thrown out the case without looking at any evidence.
They say there is no evidence because they refuse to look at it...
That is what Superior Courts are for.
Contumacious
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,794
You are 100% correct
showpan
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,385
Fwiw, a firm with Rothschild in its name has made suggestions on how to use FRCP to introduce new evidence into appeals courts.
https://www.foxrothschild.com/publi...ew-evidence-during-the-pendency-of-an-appeal/
Dunno how applicable it is (I was just a lowly pro se civil plantiff in US district court many moons ago...ahh fun times, learned much) but the strategy is out there.
Contumacious
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,794
GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2020
- Messages
- 4,149
[h=1]"I Have in My Office Right Now a Huge Bag of Shredded Ballots": Sidney Powell Drops Bomb During Interview[/h]https://trendingpolitics.com/i-have-in-my-office-right-now-a-huge-bag-of-shredded-ballots-sidney-powell-drops-bomb-during-interview/?utm_source=economics
Danke
Top Rated Influencer
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 44,263
Electoral College Deadlines Not ‘Set In Stone’: Election Integrity Watchdog
BY TOM OZIMEK
December 5, 2020 Updated: December 5, 2020
Print
An election integrity watchdog said the current Electoral College deadlines not only have “zero constitutional basis” but are preventing states from fulfilling their legal and ethical obligations to ensure free and fair elections.
The Amistad Project of the non-partisan Thomas More Society released the study (pdf) on Friday, making the case that the only constitutionally-set date in the election process is Jan. 20, when the next president of the United States will be sworn in. All other dates, including the “safe harbor” deadline, the Electoral College vote on Dec. 14, and even the congressional vote count on Jan. 6, are dates set by federal law, which the paper argues are “arbitrary” and founded on obsolete concerns.
“Experts believe that the primary basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel,” The Amistad Project said in a press release.
The first of these dates, the so-called “safe harbor” deadline, is pursuant to federal law (3 U.S. Code § 5) and is understood to free a state from further contest-of-election challenges if it settles legal disputes and certifies its results at least six days before the Dec. 14 Electoral College meeting.
The Amistad Project called the Electoral College deadlines “both arbitrary and a direct impediment to states’ obligations to investigate disputed elections,” while the research paper argued for the deadlines to be overlooked, if needed, in the broader interest of thoroughly investigating allegations of voter fraud.
The view presented in the paper lines up with remarks made by attorney Sidney Powell, who has spearheaded various election-related legal challenges in battleground states, bringing forward a growing body of evidence in support of claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.
”With the fraud case, the Dec. 8 deadline doesn’t apply,” Powell told Newsmax in an interview Friday, adding, “we have at least until Dec. 14.”
Sidney Powell speaking during a press conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington on Nov. 19, 2020. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)”We might file more suits,” she said, adding that the suits she and other allies of President Donald Trump have been filing “are not pure election contests.”
“These are massive fraud suits that can set aside the results of the election due to this fraud at any time,” she said, adding, “the states should not be certifying election results in the face of it.”
The Amistad Project has also filed litigation in several key swing states, arguing that illegal actions on the part of state and local officials led to more than 1.2 million potentially fraudulent ballots.
“Through rigorous investigations supporting our litigation, we demonstrate that state and local officials brazenly violated election laws in several swing states in order to advance a partisan political agenda,” said Phill Kline, director of The Amistad Project, in a statement. “As a result, it is impossible for those states to determine their presidential electors in line with the arbitrary deadline set forth via federal statute in 1948, and thus, the only deadline that matters is Jan. 20, 2021.”
Steps relating to certification and appointment of presidential electors are often regarded as formalities and, as such, have drawn little public interest, but the mechanics of electing a U.S. president have drawn new scrutiny this year as Trump and his allies continue to pursue legal strategies attempting to prove the results were fraudulent.
The results of the Electoral College vote are due to be received, and typically approved, by Congress on Jan. 6, although lawmakers can object to accepting the electors’ votes. The Democratic-controlled House and Republican-controlled Senate would both vote separately to resolve any disputes. One has already arisen from Pennsylvania, where 75 Republican lawmakers signed a statement on Friday urging Congress to block the state’s electoral votes from being cast for Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
The Trump legal team has pursued numerous legal challenges while continuing to collect evidence in support of allegations of malfeasance. One of the strategies pursued by the Trump team has been to call on Republican state legislatures to appoint a rival set of electors pledged to Trump. This tactic suffered a setback in the battleground state of Arizona on Friday, with the state’s Republican speaker of the House of Representatives saying that calls to overturn the certified results of the presidential election are not lawful and will not happen.
According to federal law, both chambers of Congress would need to vote to accept a competing slate of electors. If they don’t, the electors appointed by the states’ governors must be used.
After the Electoral College casts its votes, the last remaining move to block the election would be an effort to vote down the electors in Congress. This tactic has been attempted before, when a handful of congressional Democrats in 2000, 2004, and 2016 objected to officially making both George W. Bush and Trump president. Their numbers were not enough to block the two men from taking office.
The Amistad Project, in the white paper, argues that there is “significant flexibility and precedent in U.S. law for changing the date that electors are appointed, changing the date electors convene to vote, and changing the date electors have their vote certified by Congress,” which, if acted upon, could provide more runway than the current deadlines suggest for Trump to prove his case of election fraud.
“For the sake of American democracy and to strengthen our fraying social fabric, it is preferable to address the fraud issues before determining who is the next president,” The Amistad Project noted in the paper, adding that “rigorous” fraud investigations would continue past Inauguration Day.
The paper called on Biden and his allies to welcome such a probe, “otherwise, a dark cloud will hang over the Biden administration if it becomes clear his election was illegitimate, and the socio-political fragmentation that is occurring in the United States will only worsen.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
BY TOM OZIMEK
December 5, 2020 Updated: December 5, 2020
An election integrity watchdog said the current Electoral College deadlines not only have “zero constitutional basis” but are preventing states from fulfilling their legal and ethical obligations to ensure free and fair elections.
The Amistad Project of the non-partisan Thomas More Society released the study (pdf) on Friday, making the case that the only constitutionally-set date in the election process is Jan. 20, when the next president of the United States will be sworn in. All other dates, including the “safe harbor” deadline, the Electoral College vote on Dec. 14, and even the congressional vote count on Jan. 6, are dates set by federal law, which the paper argues are “arbitrary” and founded on obsolete concerns.
“Experts believe that the primary basis for these dates was to provide enough time to affect the presidential transition of power, a concern which is fully obsolete in the age of internet and air travel,” The Amistad Project said in a press release.
The first of these dates, the so-called “safe harbor” deadline, is pursuant to federal law (3 U.S. Code § 5) and is understood to free a state from further contest-of-election challenges if it settles legal disputes and certifies its results at least six days before the Dec. 14 Electoral College meeting.
The Amistad Project called the Electoral College deadlines “both arbitrary and a direct impediment to states’ obligations to investigate disputed elections,” while the research paper argued for the deadlines to be overlooked, if needed, in the broader interest of thoroughly investigating allegations of voter fraud.
The view presented in the paper lines up with remarks made by attorney Sidney Powell, who has spearheaded various election-related legal challenges in battleground states, bringing forward a growing body of evidence in support of claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.
”With the fraud case, the Dec. 8 deadline doesn’t apply,” Powell told Newsmax in an interview Friday, adding, “we have at least until Dec. 14.”
“These are massive fraud suits that can set aside the results of the election due to this fraud at any time,” she said, adding, “the states should not be certifying election results in the face of it.”
The Amistad Project has also filed litigation in several key swing states, arguing that illegal actions on the part of state and local officials led to more than 1.2 million potentially fraudulent ballots.
“Through rigorous investigations supporting our litigation, we demonstrate that state and local officials brazenly violated election laws in several swing states in order to advance a partisan political agenda,” said Phill Kline, director of The Amistad Project, in a statement. “As a result, it is impossible for those states to determine their presidential electors in line with the arbitrary deadline set forth via federal statute in 1948, and thus, the only deadline that matters is Jan. 20, 2021.”
Steps relating to certification and appointment of presidential electors are often regarded as formalities and, as such, have drawn little public interest, but the mechanics of electing a U.S. president have drawn new scrutiny this year as Trump and his allies continue to pursue legal strategies attempting to prove the results were fraudulent.
The results of the Electoral College vote are due to be received, and typically approved, by Congress on Jan. 6, although lawmakers can object to accepting the electors’ votes. The Democratic-controlled House and Republican-controlled Senate would both vote separately to resolve any disputes. One has already arisen from Pennsylvania, where 75 Republican lawmakers signed a statement on Friday urging Congress to block the state’s electoral votes from being cast for Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
The Trump legal team has pursued numerous legal challenges while continuing to collect evidence in support of allegations of malfeasance. One of the strategies pursued by the Trump team has been to call on Republican state legislatures to appoint a rival set of electors pledged to Trump. This tactic suffered a setback in the battleground state of Arizona on Friday, with the state’s Republican speaker of the House of Representatives saying that calls to overturn the certified results of the presidential election are not lawful and will not happen.
According to federal law, both chambers of Congress would need to vote to accept a competing slate of electors. If they don’t, the electors appointed by the states’ governors must be used.
After the Electoral College casts its votes, the last remaining move to block the election would be an effort to vote down the electors in Congress. This tactic has been attempted before, when a handful of congressional Democrats in 2000, 2004, and 2016 objected to officially making both George W. Bush and Trump president. Their numbers were not enough to block the two men from taking office.
The Amistad Project, in the white paper, argues that there is “significant flexibility and precedent in U.S. law for changing the date that electors are appointed, changing the date electors convene to vote, and changing the date electors have their vote certified by Congress,” which, if acted upon, could provide more runway than the current deadlines suggest for Trump to prove his case of election fraud.
“For the sake of American democracy and to strengthen our fraying social fabric, it is preferable to address the fraud issues before determining who is the next president,” The Amistad Project noted in the paper, adding that “rigorous” fraud investigations would continue past Inauguration Day.
The paper called on Biden and his allies to welcome such a probe, “otherwise, a dark cloud will hang over the Biden administration if it becomes clear his election was illegitimate, and the socio-political fragmentation that is occurring in the United States will only worsen.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Danke
Top Rated Influencer
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 44,263
[h=1]SMOKING GUN, PART 2: RATIO TRANSFERS PROVED; ENTIRE ALGORITHM REVERSED, NET 200,353 VOTES FOR BIDEN[/h]
https://www.bitchute.com/video/gEGxdNYkQVz7/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/gEGxdNYkQVz7/
Danke
Top Rated Influencer
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2007
- Messages
- 44,263
[FONT="]
Dominion Advisor Met With John Podesta Offering ‘Anything’ That Would Help Defeat Trump, According to Email Released by WikiLeaks[/FONT]
[FONT="]An email previously released by WikiLeaks reveals that a Dominion Voting advisor met with John Podesta during Hillary Clinton’s campaign to discuss ways that they could help to defeat Donald Trump.[/FONT]
[FONT="]In 2018, Dominion Voting announced that it had been acquired by its management team and Staple Street Capital, a New York-based private equity firm, who was being advised by Kirkland & Ellis LLP.[/FONT]
[FONT="]During Clinton’s campaign, according to an email chain released by WikiLeaks, Kirkland & Ellis LLP partner Kamran S. Bajwa met with John Podesta while offering “anything” to help defeat Donald Trump.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Podesta, at the time, was chair of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.[/FONT]
[FONT="]On Saturday, December 19, 2015, Bajwa wrote to Podesta that “it was a pleasure to meet this past Th in NY. As discussed, I want to do whatever I can by way of sharing ideas, raising funds, recruiting campaign volunteers, and anything else that can help with your campaign. I hope my small efforts to introduce you to a growing group of professionals like myself will be able to boost your important work for Secretary Clinton’s campaign.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]“I come to NY frequently and would welcome the opportunity to sit with you and discuss the best way to coordinate our efforts. If you will be in NY Jan 5, I will be free that day to meet you at any time and place convenient for you.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]Podesta responded by saying “can’t remember whether we discussed Trump’s effect on ISIS/radical recruitment. You following that?”[/FONT]
[FONT="]“John, just a quick note to say I was catching up with my senior partner Bill Singer back in the office and letting him know of my intentions to help your campaign as much as I can. He was very effusive in his praise of you and asked me to send along his regards. I will look forward to being touch after the break,” Bajwa wrote on December 21.[/FONT]
[FONT="]On January 2, 2016, Bajwa again followed up asking to meet with Podesta once again. He said that “I wanted to follow up on our brief conversation a few weeks back and see if you would be available to meet this coming Tuesday in NY? I will be in town for work and my schedule is flexible on Tuesday so if you can meet, I can come to you at a convenient time and place anytime prior to 5pm.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]Podesta then forwarded the email to Clinton campaign staffer Milia Fisher and asked her to find the time for the meeting.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Dominion has become the center of the election fraud scandal as anomalies and evidence of fraud just-so-happen to have been heaviest in states using their machines.[/FONT]
[FONT="]https:[/FONT]//www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/dominion-advisor-met-john-podesta-offering-anything-help-defeating-trump-according-email-released-wikileaks/
Dominion Advisor Met With John Podesta Offering ‘Anything’ That Would Help Defeat Trump, According to Email Released by WikiLeaks[/FONT]
[FONT="]An email previously released by WikiLeaks reveals that a Dominion Voting advisor met with John Podesta during Hillary Clinton’s campaign to discuss ways that they could help to defeat Donald Trump.[/FONT]
[FONT="]In 2018, Dominion Voting announced that it had been acquired by its management team and Staple Street Capital, a New York-based private equity firm, who was being advised by Kirkland & Ellis LLP.[/FONT]
[FONT="]During Clinton’s campaign, according to an email chain released by WikiLeaks, Kirkland & Ellis LLP partner Kamran S. Bajwa met with John Podesta while offering “anything” to help defeat Donald Trump.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Podesta, at the time, was chair of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.[/FONT]
[FONT="]On Saturday, December 19, 2015, Bajwa wrote to Podesta that “it was a pleasure to meet this past Th in NY. As discussed, I want to do whatever I can by way of sharing ideas, raising funds, recruiting campaign volunteers, and anything else that can help with your campaign. I hope my small efforts to introduce you to a growing group of professionals like myself will be able to boost your important work for Secretary Clinton’s campaign.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]“I come to NY frequently and would welcome the opportunity to sit with you and discuss the best way to coordinate our efforts. If you will be in NY Jan 5, I will be free that day to meet you at any time and place convenient for you.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]Podesta responded by saying “can’t remember whether we discussed Trump’s effect on ISIS/radical recruitment. You following that?”[/FONT]
[FONT="]“John, just a quick note to say I was catching up with my senior partner Bill Singer back in the office and letting him know of my intentions to help your campaign as much as I can. He was very effusive in his praise of you and asked me to send along his regards. I will look forward to being touch after the break,” Bajwa wrote on December 21.[/FONT]
[FONT="]On January 2, 2016, Bajwa again followed up asking to meet with Podesta once again. He said that “I wanted to follow up on our brief conversation a few weeks back and see if you would be available to meet this coming Tuesday in NY? I will be in town for work and my schedule is flexible on Tuesday so if you can meet, I can come to you at a convenient time and place anytime prior to 5pm.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]Podesta then forwarded the email to Clinton campaign staffer Milia Fisher and asked her to find the time for the meeting.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Dominion has become the center of the election fraud scandal as anomalies and evidence of fraud just-so-happen to have been heaviest in states using their machines.[/FONT]
[FONT="]https:[/FONT]//www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/dominion-advisor-met-john-podesta-offering-anything-help-defeating-trump-according-email-released-wikileaks/
Contumacious
Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,794
Thank you sir, there is moe' :
Trump Team Begins Forensic Examination of Dominion Machines in Michigan
President Donald Trump’s legal team began a forensic analysis of Dominion voting machines in Michigan after a judge on Friday permitted the examination.
.
“Our team is going to be able to go in this morning at about 8:30 [a.m.] and will be there for about eight hours to conduct that forensic examination and we’ll have the results in about 48 hours, and that’ll tell us a lot about these machines,” attorney Jenna Ellis told Fox News on Sunday.
enhanced_deficit
Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 28,575
Giving them 14 days instead of 10 days (due to 4 Thanksgiving holidays) was the right thing to do.
But not so sure if MAGA legal team at this point is causing more good or harm to GOP's future.
3 days ago
Pro-Trump Lawyer Attacks GA GOP Governor Brian Kemp at Bonkers Rally, Chants of ‘Lock Him Up!’
Don’t Vote and harass Kemp: Pro-Trump attorney instructs Georgia voters
But not so sure if MAGA legal team at this point is causing more good or harm to GOP's future.
3 days ago
Pro-Trump Lawyer Attacks GA GOP Governor Brian Kemp at Bonkers Rally, Chants of ‘Lock Him Up!’
Don’t Vote and harass Kemp: Pro-Trump attorney instructs Georgia voters
enhanced_deficit
Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 28,575
They are not getting support from GOP leaders though:
Gingrich: 'Lin Wood and Sidney Powell are totally destructive'
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...ly-destructive
Gingrich: 'Lin Wood and Sidney Powell are totally destructive'
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...ly-destructive
Firestarter
Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2016
- Messages
- 5,272
Personally I find the starter of this thread less than credible.
I believe it posts blatant lies for personal gain.
Maybe we should bump this thread now and then just to remind us...
I believe it posts blatant lies for personal gain.
Maybe we should bump this thread now and then just to remind us...
Similar threads
