Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[beanman12345]

There's different levels of evidence. And you apparently do not understand them.

In a criminal court, the level of evidence required is most stringent.

In a civil court, there is a bit more leeway. Testimony evidence (such as sworn affidavits from GOP poll monitors) is stronger evidence in civil court and has a greater chance of scoring a victory. That might be enough for people to sue the eternal hell out of several swing states and cost them millions and millions of dollars.

Then there is Trump working with republican state legislatures to convince them to either send the GOP electors or not send any electors. That is NOT a court at ALL. That is just an assembly of representatives. ZERO evidence is legally required (although they may ask for evidence). They could decide the moon is too bright and send the GOP electors. But at the 11th hour, they can look at some testimony by new expert witnesses, decide that is enough, and send Trump back to the White House for second term.

After the last 4 years of Trumpsters lying, spreading bullshit, throwing conspiracies, proving how terrible people they are in every sense of the word and just generally not living in reality, the copium trumpsters have been taking the last few weeks has been so cathartic. Been watching compellations of ya'll on youtube, all hilarious.

[postman1782]

"Well, yeah. Being biased towards something makes you incapable of making a fair and balanced point. So anyhow, speaking as a Republican here's why yadda yadda hypocritical point blah blah."

Yeah, pretty much. I can guarantee that Kokolums doesn't have the education to even be that lawyer's coffeeboy, let alone try to debunk anything he says.

[Machismo]

That guy is an avowed democrat so take anything he says with a titanic grain of salt.

You have called for us all to submit to Nazis, and demanded we vote for Nazis, so how should we interpret your words?

[Yetanothernewbie]

There's different levels of evidence. And you apparently do not understand them.

In a criminal court, the level of evidence required is most stringent.

In a civil court, there is a bit more leeway. Testimony evidence (such as sworn affidavits from GOP poll monitors) is stronger evidence in civil court and has a greater chance of scoring a victory. That might be enough for people to sue the eternal hell out of several swing states and cost them millions and millions of dollars.

Then there is Trump working with republican state legislatures to convince them to either send the GOP electors or not send any electors. That is NOT a court at ALL. That is just an assembly of representatives. ZERO evidence is legally required (although they may ask for evidence). They could decide the moon is too bright and send the GOP electors. But at the 11th hour, they can look at some testimony by new expert witnesses, decide that is enough, and send Trump back to the White House for second term.

Jesus Christ stop huffing paint fumes. At this rate you will never get to see your totally will happen civil war if you keep going ham on those fumes.

[ati87]

That guy is an avowed democrat so take anything he says with a titanic grain of salt.

Everything to the left of the extreme right, which Trump represents, is a "avowed democrat". This list includes reality and facts and lifetime (extreme) right-wing Republicans who happen to be just consistent in there ideals that they don't just throw everything out because the cult-leader said so.

[Dontrike]

That guy is an avowed democrat so take anything he says with a titanic grain of salt.

He's also a lawyer that knows the law, unlike you, that orange messiah of yours, and his leaking lawyers.

[alexw]

Jesus Christ stop huffing paint fumes. At this rate you will never get to see your totally will happen civil war if you keep going ham on those fumes.

Paint fumes?

Paint fumes is not enough for that level of insanity. He's been imbibing Trump's cranial fluid for sure.

[Redwyrm]

he's a lawyer (responding to Kookoolums post). It doesn't matter if he is a Democrat, Republican or Space Alien. The law is the law. Lawyers don't interpret the law. They use it to either defend or prosecute. It's a tool just like a hammer is to a carpenter. Now some lawyers, like Sydney Powell, use the wrong tool or use the tools they have poorly. But, that isn't a matter of interpretation. It's a case of a lawyer trying to bend reality and is easily spotted and rightly called out.

[Waniou]

Then there is Trump working with republican state legislatures to convince them to either send the GOP electors or not send any electors. That is NOT a court at ALL. That is just an assembly of representatives. ZERO evidence is legally required (although they may ask for evidence). They could decide the moon is too bright and send the GOP electors. But at the 11th hour, they can look at some testimony by new expert witnesses, decide that is enough, and send Trump back to the White House for second term.

You know that's a bad thing right? Like, you do realise why this is a very very bad thing right?

[Felya]

An actual sane lawyer made fun of Giuliani and he's pointing out my lover, Trump, has no chance! Democrat shill! Waaaahh!

He didn’t make fun of him... he even explained how ‘with prejudice’, isn’t as big a deal as people make it out to be. It’s just such a stupid case, you think he is making fun of it, by simply reading the judgement.

[Felya]

he's a lawyer (responding to Kookoolums post). It doesn't matter if he is a Democrat, Republican or Space Alien. The law is the law. Lawyers don't interpret the law. They use it to either defend or prosecute. It's a tool just like a hammer is to a carpenter. Now some lawyers, like Sydney Powell, use the wrong tool or use the tools they have poorly. But, that isn't a matter of interpretation. It's a case of a lawyer trying to bend reality and is easily spotted and rightly called out.

The judges rejecting these cases are largely Trump appointed. Even that hard core Texas Trump supporter judge, rejected their claims for voting booths, before the election. They are also including Georgia GOP as part of the scheme, because they don’t have democrats in state legislature to blame.

The above highlighted for @Kokolums, Trump has gone after his supporters and GOP, for simply stating facts that Trump doesn’t like. How well does that bode well for this civil war? Will he march into Russia during winter or have a Bob on nation television saying Americans troops are not at the White House?

[Breccia]

he's a lawyer (responding to Kookoolums post). It doesn't matter if he is a Democrat, Republican or Space Alien.

The fact that a Space Alien would have better results than Trump's legal team should be extremely concerning for non-challenge-answering members of the rabid fanbase who are admitting cowardice, especially those who flap their flippers and yell ORK ORK ORK at passing San Fransiscans.

[Beazy]

So Trump isn't going away. He just gets stronger.

LoL. How will he get stronger by losing his power as president? You're just making up shitty reddit fan fiction at this point. Its kind of sad. If you're pro-trolling then, by all means, carry on. . . . but if you're serious, I really hope you're getting the treatment you need because your mental state is clearly in a dangerous place right now.

[Belize]

There's different levels of evidence.

No, there isn't.

[Felya]

The fact that a Space Alien would have better results than Trump's legal team should be extremely concerning for non-challenge-answering members of the rabid fanbase who are admitting cowardice, especially those who flap their flippers and yell ORK ORK ORK at passing San Fransiscans.

That’s actually a point Carlson made... I’m not sure if it’s an intended reference, but he used UFO guests as an example of providing more evidence than Trump’s lawyer.

[dextersmith]

No, what’s more likely is Trump spends the next four years fighting criminal cases and lawsuits, desperately trying to avoid jail.

Imagine a scene where Trump can't go to the common area of a prison without his post presidential body guards because the population majority is Mexican. lol

[Redwyrm]

Imagine a scene where Trump can't go to the common area of a prison without his post presidential body guards because the population majority is Mexican. lol

if Trump goes to prison, and that is a big IF, it would be the cushiest of white collar prisons. Possibly just even house arrest. Think Martha Stewart levels.

[dextersmith]

if Trump goes to prison, and that is a big IF, it would be the cushiest of white collar prisons. Possibly just even house arrest. Think Martha Stewart levels.

I have no doubt his prison will be a penthouse suite in NYC.

[Biglog]

I think Trump's known since a bit before the Four Seasons Landscaping debacle that the fraud legal angle was never going to work. It's why he put Guiliani in charge to take the fall. Bannon, Bolton, Mattis, Fauci...you'd think Guiliani would know what is coming. Trump never admits "losing" at anything, and when he does lose it just means someone around him takes the fall as the scapegoat. So Rudy might still be trying, but Trump is going to throw him under the bus very soon. He'll continue to make vague baseless claims like "we got a lot of votes, how could we have lost", and will blame Rudy for failing in the legal fight rather than ever admitting he lost the election because he got fewer votes than Biden. In fact Rudy is going to be demonized far worse than Bannon and the others, since it's going to be portrayed as Trump won but Guiliani just was so incompetent that he couldn't win the legal case. So Trump's election "loss" will be pinned on Rudy, which will incur the wrath of his Randy Quaid base far more than the others that were demonized after being blamed for other Trump failings.

[Endus]

That guy is an avowed democrat so take anything he says with a titanic grain of salt.

Seems like we need to repeat something.

Someone's political affiliation has absolutely fuck-all to do with their reliability.

You choosing to refuse to listen to the Legal Eagle because "he's a Democrat" is just you stating that you're a blindly partisan Republican who will refuse to even consider anything a Democrat has to say on its merits, because they're a Democrat.

That's you expressing your own blind extremism. Not making an argument against your subject or their argument.

And no, this isn't a "both sides do this" issue. People mock Republican arguments because those arguments are, for the most part, evidence-agnostic horseshit that doesn't make any sense whatsoever, or which is clearly intended to bring about execrable outcomes as the deliberate intent of that argument. They get judged on the lack of merit of their position, which is why Republicans in general get slammed. It does not get done the other way; you don't see Democrats refusing to consider a smart idea by a Republican "because they're Republican". Hell, look at the ACA; patterned after Romneycare. Just by way of example.