- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Where to find court's reasoning on denying Trump/Powell cases
Posted on 1/8/21 at 9:58 am
Posted on 1/8/21 at 9:58 am
I'd like to read some of the reasons that courts denied or tossed out the petitions (right word?) regarding election irregularity. This would be at state level.
My intent is to see if they were rejected on the merits, particularly after a thorough review of information provided, or tossed primarily on procedural grounds.
I know there were alot of cases in a short time but have to start somewhere.
My intent is to see if they were rejected on the merits, particularly after a thorough review of information provided, or tossed primarily on procedural grounds.
I know there were alot of cases in a short time but have to start somewhere.
9
Posted on 1/8/21 at 9:59 am to TigersnJeeps
Just trust BristolDawg and EbbandFlow.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:00 am to TigersnJeeps
quote:
My intent is to see if they were rejected on the merits, particularly after a thorough review of information provided,
Not.
A.
Single.
One.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:01 am to TigersnJeeps
they were laughed out because they were all bull shite based on made up by internet idiots and other misfits
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:02 am to TigersnJeeps
quote:
rejected on the merits
Wouldn't this mean they actually had to look/hear some sort of evidence? Nothing I read showed any indication they wanted evidence presented in any fashion.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:02 am to boxcar willie
So you mean like
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:03 am to TigersnJeeps
On the ones I saw, lack of credible evidence was listed as the reason.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:04 am to dakarx
quote:
Nothing I read showed any indication they wanted evidence presented in any fashion.
None was provided.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:04 am to TigersnJeeps
I know you're looking for state, but the opinion of the federal district judge in the Michigan case is at document 62.
LINK /
LINK /
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:05 am to TigersnJeeps
They were rejected on the basis of precedent in old case law. For further reference see Chinese Communist Party vs Orange Man Bad.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:06 am to Froman
I thought most, if not all, ruled the plaintiffs did not have standing.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:07 am to Froman
quote:
None was provided.
to my knowledge all were thrown out on standing. There was never an evidentiary hearing, but I'm not fully engaged in the day to day legal news, just a casual observer.
ETA: I think this is the trick being used to suppress meaningful investigation. They throw out the case on standing and then claim (truthfully but deceptively) that "no evidence has been presented!"
This post was edited on 1/8/21 at 10:11 am
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:30 am to TigersnJeeps
take the one about there were more votes cast in Detroit than there are registered voters there (which by the way, Trump offered up in his insurrection speech on Wednesday). Courts would throw stuff like that out because it is obviously not true and only an idiot (trump) would offer it up as evidence. Or that dead people voted. Yes there were a few instances where people died between the dates when they mailed in there ballots and election day (these votes were not counted). Also there are instances where people have the same name as someone else who may have died decades ago. Just many stupid conspiracies that were not worth the courts time.
Posted on 1/8/21 at 10:43 am to TigersnJeeps
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News