Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
Texas sues four states over illegal changes to election law prior to election >

Texas sues four states over illegal changes to election law prior to election

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Texas sues four states over illegal changes to election law prior to election

Old 12-09-2020, 11:46 PM
  #11  
Spike
 
ammodotcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: Harvey, Louisiana
Posts: 45
Default

Originally Posted by Fieldmouse View Post
Let's all welcome AZ to the party to make it the 18th state.
Second that. Had zero business going blue this time around.
ammodotcom is offline  
Old 12-10-2020, 09:17 AM
  #12  
Boone & Crockett
 
ipscshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Republic of Texas
Posts: 11,453
Default

Originally Posted by Oldtimr View Post
Whatever it takes to dump the illegitimate Biden and Harris.
Dumping Biden.... LOL ... Biden will be dumped by the Democrat Party using the 25th Amendment. He's clearly unfit for office and was used as a Trojan horse to get Harris into the Oval Office. Recall that Pelosi was looking into the 25th months before the election. Democrat morons were foaming at the mouth, thinking it was to get rid of Trump. Given the proximity to the election, I thought it was pretty clear that she's looking to toss Senile Joe out.

Those who forced Joe to run should be prosecuted for elder abuse.

And, once again, every person who voted for Biden/Harris is a moron and/or a traitor.
ipscshooter is offline  
Old 12-10-2020, 05:26 PM
  #13  
Nontypical Buck
 
Valorius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,846
Default

This was not an election, it was a coup.

But beyond that, this Texas suit doesnt even go after the fraud angle....it goes directly after the 4 states that CLEARLY violated the US constitution by usurping the SOLE authority of the state legislatures to decide the manner of elections.

If the US supreme court has the guts to actually take the case, this is BY FAR the best case that has been presented so far, from a purely constitutional perspective.
Valorius is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 09:06 AM
  #14  
Super Moderator
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 17,733
Default

Agreed. Going after fraud could take years whereas violating state constitution violations could be handled this month. It's a smart play that will rectify the main issue of an election being stolen by cheating and fraud. It will be up to the states to punish the party behind the cheating in their respective states and hopefully even prosecute some of the scumbags. I can wait for that and won't be surprised if it doesn't happen or only partially happens. Getting these fraudulent election results corrected is the main issue and goal. So far, this looks doable.

IPSC, I don't disagree with your theory but am wondering why they chose such a doofus as Harris for their next in line.
CalHunter is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 09:44 AM
  #15  
Nontypical Buck
 
Valorius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,846
Default

For the fraud Trump and Barr should have already launched a special counsel investigation with an unlimited budget to "Investigate the 2020 election fraud matter."

That should have happened a month ago.

But Barr is a deep swamp creature, so do not expect that to ever happen. He SUPPRESSED the news that Hunter Biden was under investigation for 2 full years. All through the sham impeachment, then all through the same election. (Cough, cough- coup)

Why Trump has not fired this man 10x over, is beyond my comprehension.

Valorius is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 04:10 PM
  #16  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: fla
Posts: 997
Default

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...728_story.html

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/11/polit...den/index.html
AMERICA IS PRETTY MUCH SCREWED ROYAL
you can expect all kinds of socialist crap ignoring limiting or eliminating individual rights and the constitution, in the near future
the SCOTUS pretty much stated they don,t give a rats ass if 4 states ignored the constitution to allow the dems to cheat their way into power

Last edited by hardcastonly; 12-11-2020 at 04:13 PM.
hardcastonly is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 04:17 PM
  #17  
Typical Buck
 
WV 67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: West by god Virginia
Posts: 534
Default

Originally Posted by hardcastonly View Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...728_story.html

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/11/polit...den/index.html
AMERICA IS PRETTY MUCH SCREWED ROYAL
you can expect all kinds of socialist crap ignoring limiting or eliminating individual rights and the constitution, in the near future
the SCOTUS pretty much stated they don,t give a rats ass if 4 states ignored the constitution to allow the dems to cheat their way into power
Yep at this point itís the beginning of an end , nothing left to do that doesnít cause total chaos and blood shed one thing is for certain I will always be me and live like I always have
WV 67 is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 04:27 PM
  #18  
Typical Buck
 
hubby11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Clifton, VA
Posts: 846
Default

The order:

155, ORIG. TEXAS V. PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL.

The State of Texasís motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.

Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins: In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.


I wish the Supreme Court justices had a little more guts in better explaining their reason(s) for dismissing the case, with respect to the lack of standing and other issues.

With respect to Justices Alito and Thomas' statement, in case anyone is curious, as I understand it, they hold an opinion that the SC must hear any case of original jurisdiction (such as a dispute between states), whereas the majority believe that the SC may decide to reject such cases outright, without holding a hearing or allowing argument in some form.
hubby11 is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 04:46 PM
  #19  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: fla
Posts: 997
Default

hardcastonly is offline  
Old 12-11-2020, 05:29 PM
  #20  
Nontypical Buck
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,334
Default

Something sounds a little fishy. Like 7 out of 9 people ducking a controversial issue.
elkman30 is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.