Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

A campaign that cannot seem to find its feet.

 
 
zperxJJs_bigger.jpg
 
Meanwhile, Trump ad campaign has been inconsistent. He moved from a singular focus on crime & riots in the summer to momentarily emphasizing immigration to now focusing on the economy. He has alternated between running a traditional incumbent race & trying to re-run 2016
 
 
Image
 
7
 
28
 
53
 
 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
 
I'm pretty strongly against protectionism in federal procurement, but ...
Quote Tweet
 
546r1Xlf_normal.jpg
 
 
Tom Nichols
 
@RadioFreeTom
· 12h
If your vote for Biden hinges on any answer he might give about fracking or transgender issues or, really, any answer at all about almost any policy issue, then you're just not taking the stakes in the election seriously enough.
Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2009 Supreme Court ruling may require Barrett to recuse herself from 2020 election cases

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday.
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post)
Opinion by J. Michael Luttig
Oct. 17, 2020 at 4:53 p.m. EDT
.....

But as Barrett must already understand, her decision was made exponentially more difficult by Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., an inartful and mischievous 5-to-4 case decided over a decade ago by the court she will soon join. The ruling would seem to apply squarely to Barrett’s recusal decision and could well require, or at least counsel, her recusal.

Caperton involved a litigant who spent $3 million to help elect a West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals justice, who then voted to reverse a $50 million damage award against his benefactor. The U.S. Supreme Court found that the judge should have recused himself. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that recusal may be constitutionally required even where a judge is not actually biased, if there is a “serious risk of actual bias.”

....

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

A 2009 Supreme Court ruling may require Barrett to recuse herself from 2020 election cases

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday.

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post)

Opinion by J. Michael Luttig
Oct. 17, 2020 at 4:53 p.m. EDT
.....

But as Barrett must already understand, her decision was made exponentially more difficult by Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., an inartful and mischievous 5-to-4 case decided over a decade ago by the court she will soon join. The ruling would seem to apply squarely to Barrett’s recusal decision and could well require, or at least counsel, her recusal.

Caperton involved a litigant who spent $3 million to help elect a West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals justice, who then voted to reverse a $50 million damage award against his benefactor. The U.S. Supreme Court found that the judge should have recused himself. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that recusal may be constitutionally required even where a judge is not actually biased, if there is a “serious risk of actual bias.”

....

Totally invalid argument.  Caperton involved a plaintiff providing direct financial assistance to a candidate for a judgeship.   Here the president of the United States performed his duty to nominate someone for Supreme Court justice.

There is no evidence that Barrett is biased. If she is biased, then every judge appointed by Trump is just as biased.  Could then get into whether or not judges appointed by any Republican would be biased and if the Dem appointed would be biased toward Biden.

Just because her appointment came up now does not affect any of this.  Constitutionally, Trump, McConnell and Graham can do exactly what they are doing.  In addition,  no precedent is binding on any courts.  They carry weight, but can be ignored at will.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
DwpFPL-9_bigger.jpg
 
I’m in the Florida Panhandle right now. There were 12 TV ads in the last hour for Joe Biden. Only 2 for Donald Trump. I saw the exact same thing in Jacksonville yesterday. This is the most important state for Trump, yet he’s being outspent bigly.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

new-inauguration-biden.jpg?w=480&h=320&c

If elected, I hope that Biden doesn't get writer's cramp the afternoon of January 20, 2021 from overturning every single Donald Trump executive order.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

:unsure:

thought he was banking on SCOTUS ?

This is scary but it would be totally unrealistic to think that Trump won't do anything possible to try to sabotage any close state vote that he loses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 
BREAKING: HUGE WIN at the 4th C. Court of Appeals for NC voters!
 
By a 12-3 margin, the Court rejects the Republican legislators' effort to disallow votes cast & mailed back on or before Election Day but received after 11/6.
 
The “simple and commonsense change” approved by the state court to extend the deadline from 3 days to 9 days does not change voters’ obligations — all ballots must still be mailed on or before Election Day.
But it recognizes the reality of an overburdened postal service.
 
:)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mr6666 said:

:unsure:

thought he was banking on SCOTUS ?

He is depending on SCOTUS.  That is why he and McConnell are pushing so hard to get Barrett on the court in time to vote.  Make no mistake, she will vote and she will vote for whatever benefits Trump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bogie56 said:
The Washington Post
The Post Most
 
 
d064c9fc800a8dcca425bf6b495e8679-X543XSATFYI6XPAQICZFHAXRXY-600-0-70-8.jpg

(Maria Alejandra Cardona/Reuters)

Shouting matches, partisan rallies, guns at polling places: Tensions run high at early-voting sites

Dozens of allegations of possible voter intimidation and improper campaigning have marked the early days of voting.

By Joshua Partlow   Read more »

More documentation of how Trump and the GOP plan to steal the election.   Similar to how the Nazis took over in Germany and the Bolsheviks in Russia.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ElCid said:

More documentation of how Trump and the GOP plan to steal the election.   Similar to how the Nazis took over in Germany and the Bolsheviks in Russia.

While such tricks worked in the past,   I don't see them working much (as measured by people NOT voting due).   Instead I can see such tricks leading to MORE Dem and Non-GOP voter turnout.

I think we are seeing this with early voting and people willing to wait in line,  sometimes for hours,  just to vote.       Trump advising that such voting was full of fraud (as a way to suppress voting),   caused the opposite effect.      I.e. enough folks have figured Trump and the GOP out.     Remember even with the tricks in 2016 Trump won many states by < 1%.   This time around Biden will win most (if not all)  of those  close-contest-in-2016 states by 3%- 5%

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

While such tricks worked in the past,   I don't see them working much (as measured by people NOT voting due).   Instead I can see such tricks leading to MORE Dem and Non-GOP voter turnout.

I think we are seeing this with early voting and people willing to wait in line,  sometimes for hours,  just to vote.       Trump advising that such voting was full of fraud (as a way to suppress voting),   caused the opposite effect.      I.e. enough folks have figured Trump and the GOP out.     Remember even with the tricks in 2016 Trump won many states by < 1%.   This time around Biden will win most (if not all)  of those  close-contest-in-2016 states by 3%- 5%

Let's hope you are right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to fake e-mails from Iran to US voters:   It appears Iran doesn't wish for Trump to win re-election.    

Biden should say that if he hears of any more Iran stunts to help him win the election,  he will hire John Bolton  to lead the re-negotiations of the Iran Nuclear deal.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...