AgBMF42 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

txagbear said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

txagbear said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

We will soon see who is wrong.

---

Well we've known for sometime who was wrong on Russia Russia Russia

---

Nice attempt at deflection. That's what you should try at this point

---

40 million. How much more would you think needs to be wasted to "prove" Russia, Russia, Russia???

---

At least they got convictions. How much was spent on Benghazi or fast and furious? You had no problems with that. What type of law did you practice? Starting to have my doubts

---

Far more law than you pretend to have practiced. And the administration that caused Benghazi did not ever investigate it. Ever. But you are the one who was happy an American Ambassador was murdered and drug through the streets.

That is who you are.

---

Yeah saying someone is happy because an ambassador was drug through the streets is ****ing insane. TDS did a number on you.

---

AgBMF42 said:

---

Because you pretend like the Russia investigation was a hoax when it proved there was a bunch of shady **** going on and that there was obstruction from finding anymore.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

AgBMF42 said:

---

Because you pretend like the Russia investigation was a hoax when it proved there was a bunch of shady **** going on and that there was obstruction from finding anymore.

---

Russia investigation was totally a hoax.

There was no obstruction of justice, not by the Trump administration. A lot by Team Mueller, though. They destroyed evidence by wiping all of their government issued phones. They falsified evidence. Changed emails. Repeatedly lied to federal courts. Especially in the Flynn case.

Team Mueller threatened lawyers and blackmailed them, again in the Flynn case*. But since they were from Holder's firm, they didn't report it nor press charges.

See a pattern yet?

*I know you have zero clue about the FARA filings that Holder's firm completely screwed up to put Flynn in the crosshairs. But it happened. And then when he was under criminal investigation for their f***up, they should have ceased representing him and sent him to another criminal attorney. But again since this is Holder's firm, they did not. Blatant huge conflict of interest and malpractice. The legal profession that I signed up for nearly 40 years ago, is not the corrupt system we have now.

And again, you support a lie about Russian interference in an election but completely and totally deny the blatant and provable fraud right before you in this one.

Hope you and your family enjoy the lack of the fruits of your labor because you are just a serf now. I'm retired, have land, livestock, plenty of game and fish and gardens. Water wells. I'll be fine much longer than you will be.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

AgBMF42 said:

---

according to you the US Constitution says the state legislature can award the EVs however they want, you have been saying that for weeks.

---

I understand you are a reading way more into my posts than what I am saying because nuance is lost on you. (Much like several other self-proclaimed Dem lawyers on this board) but you miss the salient points.

So I'll type in capitals, bolded and italics so you can't miss it.

WHEN THE INTEGRITY OF THE ELECTION IS IN SERIOUS DOUBT, STATE LEGISLATURES HAVE AN ON-GOING CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO ACT, EVEN AFTER THE ELECTION.

Until SCOTUS rules on that question, it is unsettled law.

But here's something for trying.



Enjoy.

---

MASAXET said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

AgBMF42 said:

---

according to you the US Constitution says the state legislature can award the EVs however they want, you have been saying that for weeks.

---

I understand you are a reading way more into my posts than what I am saying because nuance is lost on you. (Much like several other self-proclaimed Dem lawyers on this board) but you miss the salient points.

So I'll type in capitals, bolded and italics so you can't miss it.

WHEN THE INTEGRITY OF THE ELECTION IS IN SERIOUS DOUBT, STATE LEGISLATURES HAVE AN ON-GOING CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO ACT, EVEN AFTER THE ELECTION.

Until SCOTUS rules on that question, it is unsettled law.

But here's something for trying.



Enjoy.

---

Can you explain where you derive the duty you speak of in the bolded?

---

Old McDonald said:

---

part of me does wish it would go to the supreme court. when they strike it down, hopefully it would convince some of those 39% that the ultimate result of the election was legitimate. i have a feeling it won't, but if SCOTUS can't convince them no one short of trump will.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

AgBMF42 said:

---

Because you pretend like the Russia investigation was a hoax when it proved there was a bunch of shady **** going on and that there was obstruction from finding anymore.

---

Russia investigation was totally a hoax.

There was no obstruction of justice, not by the Trump administration. A lot by Team Mueller, though. They destroyed evidence by wiping all of their government issued phones. They falsified evidence. Changed emails. Repeatedly lied to federal courts. Especially in the Flynn case.

Team Mueller threatened lawyers and blackmailed them, again in the Flynn case*. But since they were from Holder's firm, they didn't report it nor press charges.

See a pattern yet?

*I know you have zero clue about the FARA filings that Holder's firm completely screwed up to put Flynn in the crosshairs. But it happened. And then when he was under criminal investigation for their f***up, they should have ceased representing him and sent him to another criminal attorney. But again since this is Holder's firm, they did not. Blatant huge conflict of interest and malpractice. The legal profession that I signed up for nearly 40 years ago, is not the corrupt system we have now.

And again, you support a lie about Russian interference in an election but completely and totally deny the blatant and provable fraud right before you in this one.

Hope you and your family enjoy the lack of the fruits of your labor because you are just a serf now. I'm retired, have land, livestock, plenty of game and fish and gardens. Water wells. I'll be fine much longer than you will be.

---

Quote:

---

14. Absentee voting.
(a) The Legislature shall, by general law, provide a manner in which, and the time and place at which, qualified electors who may, on the occurrence of any election, be absent from the municipality of their residence, because their duties, occupation or business require them to be elsewhere or who, on the occurrence of any election, are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability or who will not attend a polling place because of the observance of a religious holiday or who cannot vote because of election day duties, in the case of a county employee, may vote, and for the return and canvass of their votes in the election district in which they respectively reside.
(b) For purposes of this section, "municipality" means a city, borough, incorporated town, township or any similar general purpose unit of government which may be created by the General Assembly.

---

unmade bed said:

---

So I guess this isn't happening. Hopefully Ted agrees to argue the Texas case if the Supreme Court takes it up. He would be a huge upgrade over Ken Paxton.

---