WaltonAg18 said:

---

Remember when Hawg was talking about how accomplished and successful these lawyers are? Pepperidge farm remembers.

---

Hawg well explained her reasons for thinking Powell very credible from how she handled the very complex Flynn case and filings.

They were persuasive.

And people may mock him, but Rudy Giuliani was one of the greats in legal history --- and deserves continued benefit of the doubt far more than any of the Zucker-minded -- everything is a script like O'Keefe showed -- MSM editorial boards on this matter.

Rudy may yet deliver, though my doubts are now very high.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Troutslime said:

---

Explain the spikes.

---

In America we have places called cities. You see lots of people live in them, there are small towns too with fewer people. When big cities report election results their numbers are bigger than small towns, on a graph they look like "spikes" - this happens in every election.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk, if you'd like to learn more read this:

https://reason.com/2020/11/16/dont-buy-the-debunked-dominion-voting-machine-conspiracy-theory/

---

Yet they favored one candidate.

sts7049 said:

---

ttu_85 said:

---

sts7049 said:

---

the only thing they say anymore is "remember russia!" "but libs love the MSM!"

it's elementary school logic honestly

---

Now this is funny. Imagine when Dem-Joe is front of the cameras every day tripping over his tongue. We will have so much to say all of it at the left's expense. We had our fool now its your turn.

---

i have no doubt this will be you and this board the next 4 years

---

Not at all. I love being the opposition. its more fun

Did you think inner Detroit or Philadelphia might flip red this election cycle? Trump actually did better in these cities than last time by a small bit.

Charpie said:

---

He's a sock and not worth your time

---

You are the only one worth my time.



And if he took out the words "scholarly" and "humorless" I'd agree with him 100%

John Maplethorpe said:

---

Troutslime said:

---

Explain the spikes.

---

In America we have places called cities. You see lots of people live in them, there are small towns too with fewer people. When big cities report election results their numbers are bigger than small towns, on a graph they look like "spikes" - this happens in every election.

Thank you for coming to my TED Talk, if you'd like to learn more read this:

https://reason.com/2020/11/16/dont-buy-the-debunked-dominion-voting-machine-conspiracy-theory/

---

There is hardly anything substantial in that article, and certainly nothing about cities vs. small towns.

What a waste of time.

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-14480_Powell-Appeal-Order-Denied.pdf

As was obvious, 11th circuit says it can't hear appeal of a TRO being denied.

Would have had evidentiary hearing today but for this baseless appeal being filed.

If you're having trouble understanding why cities with millions report larger vote batches than small towns I'd be glad to help.

2/3rds of Pennsylvanians live in greater Pittsburgh or Philadelphia.

You seem to have forgotten Linn as well, who is just as accomplished.

Ain't as good as I once was and all that jazz.

BMX Bandit said:

---

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-14480_Powell-Appeal-Order-Denied.pdf

As was obvious, 11th circuit says it can't hear appeal of a TRO being denied.

Would have had evidentiary hearing today but for this baseless appeal being filed.

---

Agree. I'm not sure I have ever heard of a TRO being appealed. Much less by the winning party.

Off meds or sleep deprivation induced insanity are about the only excuses I can think of for such weird filings.

John Maplethorpe said:

---

If you're having trouble understanding why cities with millions report larger vote batches than small towns I'd be glad to help.

2/3rds of Pennsylvanians live in greater Pittsburgh or Philadelphia.

---

PA chart has only 1 spike.

The timing must have been perfect.

I don't think that's it.

They didn't want the hearing today. They knew the "appeal" would kick the "emergency" hearing they requested

WaltonAg18 said:

---

You seem to have forgotten Linn as well, who is just as accomplished.

Ain't as good as I once was and all that jazz.

---

Nah. Never heard of Lin before the Covington case. Giuliani is a figure from the grand days before this century. And of course his 2001 performance at 9/11.

BMX Bandit said:

---

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-14480_Powell-Appeal-Order-Denied.pdf

As was obvious, 11th circuit says it can't hear appeal of a TRO being denied.

Would have had evidentiary hearing today but for this baseless appeal being filed.

---

Honestly these judges are going out of their way to be courteous to these BS maneuvers and filings. Any other party would be absolutely reamed if an appellate court had to explain the below to them. I'd be embarrassed to be a part of this legal team:

Quote:

---

In our judicial system, the district court is the central forum for testing, advancing, proving, or disproving a party's allegations. It is where trials take place and the parties present their evidence. As a court of appeals, "we are a court of review, not of first view." Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709, 718, n.7 (2005). Typically, we enter the picture only after the district court has considered the parties' competing positions and a winner has emerged. Less frequently, we review preliminary injunctions or orders that ask a particularly important, purely legal question.

The district court has not issued one of those appealable orders. In this case, the district court issued an emergency temporary restraining order at the plaintiffs' request, worked at a breakneck pace to provide them an opportunity for broader relief, and was ready to enter an appealable order on the merits of their claims immediately after its expedited hearing on December 4, 2020. But the plaintiffs would not take the district court's "yes" for an answer. They appealed instead. And, because they appealed, the evidentiary hearing has been stayed and the case considerably delayed. For our part, the law requires that we dismiss the appeal and return the case to the district court for further proceedings.

---

MASAXET said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20-14480_Powell-Appeal-Order-Denied.pdf

As was obvious, 11th circuit says it can't hear appeal of a TRO being denied.

Would have had evidentiary hearing today but for this baseless appeal being filed.

---

Honestly these judges are going out of their way to be courteous to these BS maneuvers and filings. Any other party would be absolutely reamed if an appellate court had to explain the below to them. I'd be embarrassed to be a part of this legal team:

Quote:

---

In our judicial system, the district court is the central forum for testing, advancing, proving, or disproving a party's allegations. It is where trials take place and the parties present their evidence. As a court of appeals, "we are a court of review, not of first view." Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709, 718, n.7 (2005). Typically, we enter the picture only after the district court has considered the parties' competing positions and a winner has emerged. Less frequently, we review preliminary injunctions or orders that ask a particularly important, purely legal question.

The district court has not issued one of those appealable orders. In this case, the district court issued an emergency temporary restraining order at the plaintiffs' request, worked at a breakneck pace to provide them an opportunity for broader relief, and was ready to enter an appealable order on the merits of their claims immediately after its expedited hearing on December 4, 2020. But the plaintiffs would not take the district court's "yes" for an answer. They appealed instead. And, because they appealed, the evidentiary hearing has been stayed and the case considerably delayed. For our part, the law requires that we dismiss the appeal and return the case to the district court for further proceedings.

---

---

Ouch!

Trump appointee wrote the opinion.

Conservatives oddly silent on this thread, guess you need to wait on the latest OAN or NYP article to drop.

Anyway, about that star witness..

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Conservatives oddly silent on this thread, guess you need to wait on the latest OAN or NYP article to drop.

Anyway, about that star witness..

---

Just making room for idiots to post.

Wake me up when they start filing screenshots from TA threads

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Conservatives oddly silent on this thread, guess you need to wait on the latest OAN or NYP article to drop.

Anyway, about that star witness..

---

And yet you think Biden hit more votes than Obama.

Philip J Fry said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Conservatives oddly silent on this thread, guess you need to wait on the latest OAN or NYP article to drop.

Anyway, about that star witness..

---

And yet you think Biden hit more votes than Obama.

---

Larger eligible voting population, record turn out... Math checks out

She still ranks in the top half of all election workers.

polarice said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Conservatives oddly silent on this thread, guess you need to wait on the latest OAN or NYP article to drop.

Anyway, about that star witness..

---

And yet you think Biden hit more votes than Obama.

---

Larger eligible voting population, record turn out... Math checks out

---

They don't care about the facts, only about what their feelings and latest talking points email say. While I don't look forward to a Biden administration, I do look forward to the hemming and hawing on here.

Don't know about the rest of the proffered experts, but Rand McNally Ramsland is as likely to be considered an expert as Roscoe B Davis twitter account

Quote:

---

In his declaration, Ramsland candidly admits his lack of relevant knowledge, education and experience stating that he "relied on (his current employer's) experts and resources," noting that his employer, "which provides a range of security services," "contract(s) with statisticians when needed," and employs a "wide variety of cyber and cyber forensic analysts as employees, consultants and contractors." Id. Ramsland does not disclose, however, who these unidentified "experts" are, which of them were utilized, the sources of data they relied upon, the manner in which they performed whatever work they might have done and in what way Ramsland, in turn, relied on that work to prepare his own report. Id.; Bowers v. Norfolk S. Corp., 300 Fed. App'x 700, 703 (11th Cir. 2008).
Instead, Ramsland appears to be parroting analyses from other unidentified individuals who claim to possess expertise that he does not. This alone is more than sufficient to exclude his report. See Redmond v. City of East Point, Georgia, No. 1:00-CV-2492-WEJ, 2004 WL 6060552, at *15 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 29, 2004) (noting that, under Daubert, "a scientist, however well credentialed he may be, is not permitted to be the mouthpiece of a scientist in a different specialty").

---

Kanekoa the Great.

hearing in AZ today on Kraken will be short.

I've had a case in front of Judge Humetewa. To say she is "not very friendly" would be putting it very mildly.

AZ ruling to come tomorrow.

Meanwhile in MI, figuring out where to file is hard:

No surprise

In before "this was all part of the plan to distract while they worked on the TX v PA lawsuit"

BMX Bandit said:

---

No surprise

In before "this was all part of the plan to distract while they worked on the TX v PA lawsuit"

---

But the plaintiffs had spyder, the super secret expert weapon!!!