Re:YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread electio...
by DonHopkins on Thursday December 10, 2020 @09:08PM
(#25381421)
That lawsuit you're so excited about is a complete fraud, and you should feel ashamed for falling for such a transparent pack of lies. It's just recycling bogus claims that have ALREADY been disproven in court. But of course you believe it because you want to. Prepare to be sorely disappointed by reality. Texas has again made itself a laughing stock, and an embarrassment to the rest of the country.
>Battleground states file fiery condemnations of election results lawsuit as 106 House GOP back Texas
>Officials in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia have filed ferocious condemnations of the Texas lawsuit in the Supreme Court that seeks to overturn election results in the four key battleground states won by Joe Biden.
>The Pennsylvania filing describes the move by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and supported by Donald Trump, as using a “cacophony of bogus claims” in support of a “seditious abuse of the judicial process”, resting on “a surreal alternate reality”.
>State Attorney General Josh Shapiro wrote: “Texas seeks to invalidate elections in four states for yielding results with which it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas's preferred candidate for president is legally indefensible and is an affront to principles of constitutional democracy."
>Mr Trump lost the four key states, and the action by Texas is an attempt to invalidate millions of votes, thereby potentially swinging the election to him. The states’ court filings come as 106 Republican lawmakers signed onto the Texas brief in support fo delaying their certification of presidential electors.
>The Pennsylvania filing continues: “Texas's effort to get this court to pick the next president has no basis in law or fact. The court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated.”
>In her state’s filing, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel described the challenge as “unprecedented” and “without factual foundation or a valid legal basis". She wrote: “The election in Michigan is over. Texas comes as a stranger to this matter and should not be heard here.”
>Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the lawsuit an "extraordinary intrusion into Wisconsin's and the other defendant states' elections, a task that the Constitution leaves to each state."
>Attorney general of Georgia Chris Carr concurred and argued that the case does not meet the standard for the court to hear it: “Texas presses a generalised grievance that does not involve the sort of direct state-against-state controversy required for original jurisdiction.”
>He continued: "And in any case, there is another forum in which parties who (unlike Texas) have standing can challenge Georgia's compliance with its own election laws: Georgia's own courts."
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-electio...
>Battleground states file fiery condemnations of election results lawsuit as 106 House GOP back Texas
>Officials in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia have filed ferocious condemnations of the Texas lawsuit in the Supreme Court that seeks to overturn election results in the four key battleground states won by Joe Biden.
>The Pennsylvania filing describes the move by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, and supported by Donald Trump, as using a “cacophony of bogus claims” in support of a “seditious abuse of the judicial process”, resting on “a surreal alternate reality”.
>State Attorney General Josh Shapiro wrote: “Texas seeks to invalidate elections in four states for yielding results with which it disagrees. Its request for this Court to exercise its original jurisdiction and then anoint Texas's preferred candidate for president is legally indefensible and is an affront to principles of constitutional democracy."
>Mr Trump lost the four key states, and the action by Texas is an attempt to invalidate millions of votes, thereby potentially swinging the election to him. The states’ court filings come as 106 Republican lawmakers signed onto the Texas brief in support fo delaying their certification of presidential electors.
>The Pennsylvania filing continues: “Texas's effort to get this court to pick the next president has no basis in law or fact. The court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated.”
>In her state’s filing, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel described the challenge as “unprecedented” and “without factual foundation or a valid legal basis". She wrote: “The election in Michigan is over. Texas comes as a stranger to this matter and should not be heard here.”
>Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul called the lawsuit an "extraordinary intrusion into Wisconsin's and the other defendant states' elections, a task that the Constitution leaves to each state."
>Attorney general of Georgia Chris Carr concurred and argued that the case does not meet the standard for the court to hear it: “Texas presses a generalised grievance that does not involve the sort of direct state-against-state controversy required for original jurisdiction.”
>He continued: "And in any case, there is another forum in which parties who (unlike Texas) have standing can challenge Georgia's compliance with its own election laws: Georgia's own courts."