Biden Takes Georgia; Violence on Horizon

[Moksha]

Knowingly wasting the time of the court with phony lawsuits to please a deranged Trump should carry a penalty.

[Philo Sofee]

Were I a judge, I would fine the lawyers $1,000,000 and 10 years hard time for wasting my time.

[Dr Exiled]

Oh, and when do you think the firm all of a sudden found out that the position was frivolous? Don't you think they reviewed the case prior to filing anything?

I think it extremely likely that the firm knew from the start that the position was frivolous, but they couldn't resist the opportunity to enrich themselves by humoring Trump and his cronies. As long as Trump is willing to pay them handsomely to file frivolous lawsuits on his behalf, they are content to profit from his narcissism and self delusion as long as they can get away with it, or until they realized that the cost to their ethical reputation is more than they are willing to pay. I am convinced that at least some of the lawyers representing Trump merely unethical opportunists who are eagerly and unethically taking deliberate advantage of Trump's glaring deficiencies and incompetence as long as they can, with little or no regard to how much this will damage our democracy.

That is my point regarding the Lincoln Project's campaign to cancel lawyers they deem as unworthy. Representing the unpopular with certain crowds has its downside. I guess this firm didn't want to face the repercussions the Lincoln Project threatened. Maybe this is a way to defeat the election challenge, threaten social and economic ostracizing?

I think it is a bad choice to attack the messenger. Assuming the election contesting arguments are specious, just point that out and the judges will dismiss the cases. That seems to be what is happening so far. It'll be over in a few weeks. Most election contests don't end well anyway. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about, right?

[Dr Exiled]

Maybe there is something to the cancel culture angle? https://www.zerohedge.com/political/tru ... l-campaign

Why does the Lincoln Project feel it is necessary to attack the lawyers? It will only fuel right-wing conspiracy theories. I thought the idea was to accept the results and supposedly come together. Trump should be allowed to be Trump and make his claims. Assuming they fail, perhaps that will show the Trump faithful that their faith is misplaced? Perhaps that will aid the people in coming together? However, seeking to cancel the lawyers will only raise questions as to why that was even necessary when the claims were supposedly so weak?

Doctor,

If I remember correctly, the LP - while certainly lauded by many on the Democratic side of the voting aisle during this election - is composed of rather well-known Republicans of long standing. Given this, just who should receive the blowback from their action?

Perhaps the left-right paradigm doesn't fit well here? Neocons haven't liked Trump much and the LP is part of that faction. https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/08/31 ... s-to-come/

[Meadowchik]

I think it extremely likely that the firm knew from the start that the position was frivolous, but they couldn't resist the opportunity to enrich themselves by humoring Trump and his cronies. As long as Trump is willing to pay them handsomely to file frivolous lawsuits on his behalf, they are content to profit from his narcissism and self delusion as long as they can get away with it, or until they realized that the cost to their ethical reputation is more than they are willing to pay. I am convinced that at least some of the lawyers representing Trump merely unethical opportunists who are eagerly and unethically taking deliberate advantage of Trump's glaring deficiencies and incompetence as long as they can, with little or no regard to how much this will damage our democracy.

That is my point regarding the Lincoln Project's campaign to cancel lawyers they deem as unworthy. Representing the unpopular with certain crowds has its downside. I guess this firm didn't want to face the repercussions the Lincoln Project threatened. Maybe this is a way to defeat the election challenge, threaten social and economic ostracizing?

I think it is a bad choice to attack the messenger. Assuming the election contesting arguments are specious, just point that out and the judges will dismiss the cases. That seems to be what is happening so far. It'll be over in a few weeks. Most election contests don't end well anyway. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about, right?

It's a mistake to conflate any social ostracizing with the real problem of engaging in shady legal behavior that is sanctionable by the courts. The former can come with the latter but the latter is enough on it's own to have serious weight.

[ajax18]

I think it is a bad choice to attack the messenger. Assuming the election contesting arguments are specious, just point that out and the judges will dismiss the cases. That seems to be what is happening so far. It'll be over in a few weeks. Most election contests don't end well anyway. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about, right?

I'm not sure how much voter fraud is actually punished. Is it one of those deals where if you don't own property, already have a criminal record, already have bad credit, there isn't much the law can do to you anyway? If not, even prosecuting those who are caught committing voter fraud and punishing them could have a really bad effect on the next election for the side that benefits from such voter fraud even if not nearly enough voter fraud is proven to change the results of the current election.

So yeah, it makes sense that the Democrats need to squash this quick to protect their constituents and make sure that enough people are willing to commit voter fraud on their behalf to help them in future elections.

[Res Ipsa]

I think it is a bad choice to attack the messenger. Assuming the election contesting arguments are specious, just point that out and the judges will dismiss the cases. That seems to be what is happening so far. It'll be over in a few weeks. Most election contests don't end well anyway. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about, right?

I'm not sure how much voter fraud is actually punished. Is it one of those deals where if you don't own property, already have a criminal record, already have bad credit, there isn't much the law can do to you anyway? If not, even prosecuting those who are caught committing voter fraud and punishing them could have a really bad effect on the next election for the side that benefits from such voter fraud even if not nearly enough voter fraud is proven to change the results of the current election.

So yeah, it makes sense that the Democrats need to squash this quick to protect their constituents and make sure that enough people are willing to commit voter fraud on their behalf to help them in future elections.

Your are clinging to a delusion that leads you to fear and hate. You can let go by recognizing that voter fraud is generally committed by scattered individuals who identify with both parties. The people you seem to hate and fear are unlikely to vote, let alone vote fraudulently.

It is within your power to stop making yourself so miserable. As a guy said recently, what have you got to lose?

[Chap]

I think it is a bad choice to attack the messenger. Assuming the election contesting arguments are specious, just point that out and the judges will dismiss the cases. That seems to be what is happening so far. It'll be over in a few weeks. Most election contests don't end well anyway. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about, right?

I'm not sure how much voter fraud is actually punished. Is it one of those deals where if you don't own property, already have a criminal record, already have bad credit, there isn't much the law can do to you anyway? If not, even prosecuting those who are caught committing voter fraud and punishing them could have a really bad effect on the next election for the side that benefits from such voter fraud even if not nearly enough voter fraud is proven to change the results of the current election.

So yeah, it makes sense that the Democrats need to squash this quick to protect their constituents and make sure that enough people are willing to commit voter fraud on their behalf to help them in future elections.

Face the facts. Trump's lawyers took cases to court, alleging all kinds of voter fraud. Judges listened, as they were bound to, and asked where the evidence (or in some cases even the logic) was. Answer came there none that made sense. So the judges threw the cases out

This is not about 'Democrats squashing this quick'. It's about Trump's side just not having a case that stands up. Electoral fraud is a very rare thing, and Biden's majority in key states is so large that even if a few cases could be found there is no chance of changing the result.

Look, in 2016 the Democrats were told 'You lost. Get over it'. Now in 2020 it looks like Biden may get the same number of electoral college votes that Trump got last time, plus a five million surplus in the popular vote (as opposed to Trumps three million deficit last time). Trump called his victory in 2016 a landslide. This time you lost. Get over it.

Why can't you just accept that the majority of Americans have never liked having Trump as President, and now they have voted him out? That's democracy, isn't it?

[Dr Exiled]

That is my point regarding the Lincoln Project's campaign to cancel lawyers they deem as unworthy. Representing the unpopular with certain crowds has its downside. I guess this firm didn't want to face the repercussions the Lincoln Project threatened. Maybe this is a way to defeat the election challenge, threaten social and economic ostracizing?

I think it is a bad choice to attack the messenger. Assuming the election contesting arguments are specious, just point that out and the judges will dismiss the cases. That seems to be what is happening so far. It'll be over in a few weeks. Most election contests don't end well anyway. So, there shouldn't be anything to worry about, right?

It's a mistake to conflate any social ostracizing with the real problem of engaging in shady legal behavior that is sanctionable by the courts. The former can come with the latter but the latter is enough on it's own to have serious weight.

Bear in mind that by simply taking a legal position that ultimately loses doesn't automatically mean that sanctions are warranted. Here is the verified complaint filed by the law firm that withdrew:

https://cdn.donaldjtrump.com/public-fil ... -filed.pdf

In it, the Trump campaign claims there are "numerous sworn statements ... [alleging] ... egregious misconduct..." See paragraph 9 of the verified complaint.

We will see if these allegations prove true over the next few weeks. It seems a long shot that it will end up affecting the outcome at this point, however. Even so, I don't think sanctions would be warranted at this point.

[Philo Sofee]

Chap
Why can't you just accept that the majority of Americans have never liked having Trump as President, and now they have voted him out? That's democracy, isn't it?

This is worth repeating. And Biden was voted more in favor by MANY MORE MILLIONS than Trump got. Sure he can brag he got 72,000,000 votes, but Biden got MILLIONS more than that. It's over, America decided, the people voted, Biden won. Trump is looking worse by the day for not manning up and going home.