Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Say What? “Texas AG sues Michigan, 3 other states, argues Supreme Court should invalidate results”

edited December 2020 in Off-Topic
https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/texas-ag-sues-michigan-3-other-states-argues-supreme-court-should-invalidate-results

Trust me. I’ve lived in this state 74 years. Born and raised here. Know the state from end to end. From the populous Detroit metro area where I worked and lived for 30 years to the remote northern portion where I now reside. Michigan voted for Biden. Period. Not only did our current Democratic Governor, Gretchen Whitmer, support Biden - but so too did her predecessor, former Republican Governor Rick Snyder.

Trump did take the state in 2016 by a slim margin. Many stayed home and failed to vote. Apathy reigned. But not in 2020. We cared, we showed up, we voted. How in F can some wingnut from Texas and the legion of dispicables at his heels attempt to throw out the legitimate certified vote of the people of this state?

Comments

  • Preamble maneuver to provide cover for / legitimize Congressional rejection of electoral votes from these states???
  • Penn. AG called it "seditious." Ya. Agreed!
  • I feel kinda left out on this. How come they didn't challenge CA too?
  • edited December 2020
    Old_Joe said:

    I feel kinda left out on this. How come they didn't challenge CA too?

    Maybe you are next. Maybe it will take place in a non-ending wave, 36+ electoral votes at a time.

  • edited December 2020
    Maybe this is it?

    “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”
  • Suit shot down by the Supreme Court 7-2, Alito & Thomas waffled.
  • edited December 2020
    Well, not really- they actually had something of a point: they felt that the court, because in this case it was the court of original jurisdiction, should have allowed a hearing.

    Then they said that if a hearing had been granted, they would have rejected the Texas request anyway.

    Sort of- "We really should have let Texas in the front door before throwing them out". :)
  • edited December 2020
    A man said to the universe:
    “Sir, I exist!”
    “However,” replied the universe,
    “The fact has not created in me
    A sense of obligation.”


    An inflated sense of self importance, stemming perhaps from the title “Congressman.” No match it seems for those bestowed with lifetime tenure.
  • @Old_Joe expressed above the way I read it, too. Texas A.G. has no standing. "Begone!"
  • ...But let us not forget the Repugnant Party Congresspeople who signed-on in support of that SCOTUS "suit." They had already betrayed their oath of office, no less that the tRumpster--- countless times. They deserve to be indicted and tried for sedition, treason. No less than the Orange Unit. And he's been talking about pre-emptive pardons? Maybe even for himself? Putz.
  • edited December 2020
    The president can only issue pardons for federal crimes.
    The Southern District of New York has several active investigations into Mr. Trump's business dealings.
    Since these investigations fall under state jurisdiction, pardons are irrelevant.
    I hope Mr. Trump gets a fair trial and, if convicted, is prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
  • +1.
    ...Yet the fact remains: pardons at the federal level, by the Chief Executive, were never meant, it's fair to say, to cover erasure of ludicrously illegal and blatantly shameless and visible wrongdoing. They ALL deserve prison.
Sign In or Register to comment.