Actscelerate.com

None of Trump's SCOTUS appointees have spoken up yet. Slinking away?

Acts-celerate Owner Posts: 6957 **12/12/20 7:33 pm**

Your take on it?

D
_________________
The largest room in the world is the room for improvement.

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **12/12/20 7:40 pm**

These are the most preeminent jurists in the entire country. They are among the finest legal minds in the entire world. They have a consistent history of strong conservative jurisprudence.

I think the fact that not one of them found merit in the Texas case should weigh heavily on anyone who thought, or listened to media sources that told them, the case had merit and would change things for the president.

01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011 Posts: 24285 **12/12/20 7:52 pm**

I think that is one of Trumps biggest faults, YOU do not own an appointee. AND that is good for the country. They are there to interpret constitutionally and do their best with the evidence presented.

I feel a little sick to read tweets taking pot shots at the courts and his own cabinet. This is not going to be a pretty month and a week.

This election is OVER. Like the results or not (And I don't) BUT IT IS OVER. I hope Biden does better than is predicted by my sons and many people I know. I will pray for him and wish him the best, because this is my country too.

Either way it is over. WE are not going to have a revolution (I hope) and government will continue in the USA!
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **12/12/20 8:33 pm**

Cojak, you are on a roll tonight my friend. This and your "anti-state" comments in the other thread. Very smart stuff IMO.

Acts-perienced Poster Posts: 11849 **12/13/20 10:45 am**

Ben Shapiro had a good video up about this. Liberal judges have a looser idea about standing. If the court had accepted the case, it would have set a precedent that would have given liberals an awful weapon, he argued. California might sue Alabama over abortion law, arguing that their laws had an indirect effect on them, influencing women to fly to California for abortions. The case had states suing other states about their internal laws. The Supreme Court is concerned with what precedents it sets.

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **12/13/20 11:39 am**

Great point, Link. It's not an exaggeration to say this could have been the effective end of federalism. It's crazy how many elected Republicans supported it.

Acts-celerater Posts: 566 **12/13/20 7:21 pm**

Even they know that Trumpâ€™s claim is a full blown clown show. When will Christians figure this out and stop with the Christian Nationalism movement and get back to Jesus?

Acts-celerater Posts: 787 **12/13/20 8:43 pm**

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **12/13/20 8:45 pm**

I sincerely urge everyone to read this piece from Andy McCarthy, who has been a consistent Trump supporter and endorsed the president in 2020 (in fact, he wrote National Review's endorsement of the president).

He writes here about how the Trump campaign agreed in Wisconsin that there was *no fraud*.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-stunning-passage-from-the-latest-court-rejection-of-team-trump/

I urge everyone on this forum who has been saying otherwise to critically read this piece. The Trump campaign is saying one thing in public, and another in court. They are not bringing any of the so-called evidence to their court filings because they know there are legal consequences for lying in court that don't exist for press conferences.

As McCarthy writes, there's no "there" there -- literally. That's not his opinion, it's the literal facts. The Trump campaign, again and again, has written in their filings and in their agreements with the states where Trump alleges fraud to have occurred, that they are not alleging fraud. The filings are public records and you can read them for yourself. (The Sidney Powell "Kraken" lawsuits have alleged specific incidents of fraud, but based on unreliable testimony that all courts have summarily rejected.)

Folks, if you believe this stuff, you are getting played by someone who could not care less about you. I know it is very hard to hear, but you don't have to take it from me. Take it from a conservative legal expert who has fought hard for Trump and endorsed him for president over Joe Biden.

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 13654 **12/14/20 7:36 am**

I want to note also that the judge in Wisconsin refused to dismiss the case because of lack of standing and provided the campaign with the opportunity to present evidence.

McCarthy: "Judge Ludwig denied the stateâ€™s claims that the campaign lacked standing. Instead, he gave the campaign the hearing they asked for â€” the opportunity to call witnesses and submit damning exhibits."

The campaign did not accept or take advantage of this opportunity. Please, I beg anyone who believes the campaign's claims about widespread fraud to sincerely ask yourself, why did they not do this?