Is Trump Now Knocking On The Door Of The Supreme Court...

Jump to Last Post 1-4 of 4 discussions (55 posts)
  1. Sharlee01 profile image85
    Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/15291522_f1024.jpg
    Is Trump finally on his way to the Supreme Court with his allegations of voter irregularities and fraud?  It would appear we will soon know.

    "By Tom Hals

    (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Friday rejected a request by U.S. President Donald Trump's campaign to block President-elect Joe Biden from being declared the winner of the battleground state of Pennsylvania, dealing another significant setback to Trump's bid to overturn the results of the Nov. 3 election.

    "Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so," wrote Stephanos Bibas on behalf of a three-judge panel.

    "Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here," he wrote Bibas, who was nominated by Trump. The case could still be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Pennsylvania certified Biden, who won the state's popular vote, as its winner this week. Under Pennsylvania law, the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state gets all of the state's 20 electoral votes.

    Trump, a Republican, has refused to concede to his Democratic rival and continues to claim, without evidence, widespread voter fraud.

    But as his legal challenges to the results fail, Trump said on Thursday he will leave the White House if the Electoral College votes for Biden, the closest he has come to conceding the election.

    On Monday, Trump's administration cleared the way Biden to transition to the White House, giving him access to briefings and funding even as Trump vowed to continue fighting the election results.

    Soon after Friday's ruling, Trump posted a video from Newsmax on Twitter about alleged voter fraud in Nevada.

    The Trump campaign filed the Pennsylvania case earlier this month, saying that county election officials had treated mail-in ballots inconsistently and asking U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann to halt certification of the results.

    Some counties had allowed voters to fix minor deficiencies with their ballots, such as a missing "secrecy envelope," while others did not.

    Brann dismissed the case on Nov. 21, saying the case was based on "strained legal arguments" and "speculative accusations."

    He said he did not have the authority to strip the right to vote from "even a single person, let alone millions of citizens."

    On appeal, the campaign said it was focusing on the "narrow" question of whether Brann improperly refused to allow it to amend its lawsuit a second time. It had sought to add back allegations that it had earlier dropped, including claims that its due process rights were violated.

    (Reporting by Makini Brice in Washington; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Alistair Bell)

    More From Reuters:

    1. Credence2 profile image82
      Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      Trump would have the nerve after all of his baseless claims were denied by lower courts to now go to the Supreme Court?

      If the SC even gives Trump an audience they reduce themselves to partisan hacks.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        Certainly we should not give the President of the United States his day in court!  But if that isn't enough - the election went Democrat and thus should NEVER be challenged.  For any reason whatsoever - no "election" that produced a liberal politician should be challenged

        1. Credence2 profile image82
          Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          The President has not presented any proof beyond his allegations. Which court in the land is going to give any serious attention to that?

          Challenge all you want, but it had better be good, and I suspect that it won't be.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Well, certainly not a liberal court!  I particularly liked the Pa. judge that denied it because "it would mean disenfranchising millions of votes" if elections were fair and just.

            It will certainly be interesting to see if the SCOTUS will hear arguments or uphold lower courts.

            1. Credence2 profile image82
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Looks like all the Courts that denied Trump's numerous claims were "liberal"?

              I will be watching just to see if Trump actually gets an audience.

              1. GA Anderson profile image92
                GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Why would you say that all courts that have denied Pres. Trump's legal team challenges are liberal? Is that what you think Conservatives think? I am a self-described 'Conservative' and I think the courts have ruled justly—so far.

                I would welcome a SCOTUS decision, primarily as a way to put this matter to rest.

                Remember Cred, Trump supporter, and Conservative, are not synonyms.

                GA

                1. Credence2 profile image82
                  Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  You missed it, GA, it was a rhetorical question. I was responding to Wilderness who claimed that the adverse rulings Trump have been receiving regarding his claims  was due to the issue of the courts being liberal.

                  For as many failed attempts that Trump received in this matter, I would not be unreasonable to assume that many of those courts and judges were conservative as well.

                  Even if Trump supporters and conservatives are not synonyms, there is more of a correlation between the two than not. I would be correct in saying that the preponderance of conservatives supported Trump? That wouldn't be far fetched, would it? Because there is no correlation found between liberals and Trump supporter, the terms are mutually exclusive.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    "I would be correct in saying that the preponderance of conservatives supported Trump? That wouldn't be far fetched, would it?"

                    No.  As you have been told a hundred times, Trump was elected by default because there was no one else even remotely acceptable.  Ditto this time: while he has a small die hard fan base, the majority of votes for him came from those that simply cannot abide either Joe Biden or the liberal agenda.  Pretty much, then, as the reason Biden won; from what I hear most Democrats don't like him and voted for him because of the alternative.

                  2. GA Anderson profile image92
                    GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    I think you would be more correct if you said "Republicans" rather than "Conservatives."

                    I am going to be stubborn on this point Cred, Conservatives and conservatives are different animals. Relative to the court judges, you are probably correct, as in conservative, as in Republican. But, we Conservatives are not liable to that same correlation. ;-)

                    GA

                  3. GA Anderson profile image92
                    GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    I don't think you would be wrong when you say most conservatives support Pres. Trump.

                    But I would say that there is a difference between support and unqualified allegiance.

                    Pres. Trump demands the latter, but Conservatives aren't biting. Our support is not of unqualified allegiance. Republican support may be, but not mine or my fellow Conservatives.

                    GA

            2. IslandBites profile image87
              IslandBitesposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              You mean Judge Bibas, who was appointed to the court by Trump? Yes, I liked it too. I liked that Bibas wrote that on behalf of a panel of three judges, all of whom were appointed by Republican presidents. smile

              Btw, I also liked when he said: "Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so... Voters, not lawyers, choose the President. Ballots, not briefs, decide elections."

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                At first glance I agree with the judge.  But if he was right then Pa desperately needs to re-vamp their election laws, as they are ripe (and apparently used) for fraud, if not in the legal sense.

          2. Sharlee01 profile image85
            Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            It would appear you are correct he literally has rushed through the court system in record time in several states, I would say record time. One has to go the route before being heard in the Supreme Court. He is now at that point.  Gis attorneys seem to hastily file, and the claims were presented sloppily. Maybe, biding their time while working on the evidence?  If he can't present evidence the Supreme court will not hear his case.

            Alan Derschowitz opinion --- https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/a … residency/

            1. Credence2 profile image82
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Agreed, Sharlee,

              "If he can't present evidence the Supreme court will not hear his case."

              I think that the court would want to avoid partisanship and beinginvolved in a political thicket, that I think that they just as soon avoid.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image85
                Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Oh yes, I can only imagine how they are feeling about this mess possibly being dumped on their doorstep. I am very sure they hope trump does not push forward with his allegations.

      2. GA Anderson profile image92
        GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        I disagree. I think that if this reaches the level of a Supreme Court review, it should be given.

        I think such a review will be against Trump, but to deny it will leave everything in limbo—subject to all kinds of partisan claims. I don't think the Trump legal team has a leg to stand on, let's let the Supreme Court confirm that. And put this issue to rest, once and for all.

        GA

        1. Credence2 profile image82
          Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          I don't know, the only reason that this issue has been raised is the fact that Trump lost the election. If things remained the same as to the electoral process this time, would Trump had said anything if he had won? This is not like the hanging chad issues of 20 years ago.

          Doing the post-Mortem thing, the Coronavirus and how handled it was the reason he lost. Much of this beyond his contro, but a great deal of it was. It has never been an easy thing to deny an incumbent a second term.

          As far as popular vote variance and those of the Electoral College, what is Trump trying to accomplish short of a do over for the entire election, that is simply without merit. He simply lost too much for there to be much contention regarding the present outcome.

          But, I will bet you a ham sandwich that the Supreme Court will duck out from this one. It will be impossible for the court to give to Trump what it is he seeks.

          1. GA Anderson profile image92
            GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I agree. With what I know at this point, I don't see any Supreme court decision making any difference.

            GA

    2. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Yesterday Rudy G. presented a witness Retired Army Col. Phil Waldron that gave testimony in regard to the Dominion voting machines he explained how the machine is faulty and easily and quickly used to change votes. This hearing was televised in a few places online, but the media did not cover the hearing.  This stuff is shocking! This testimony is an hour-long but clearly provides evidence that the Dominion voter system may have been used to give Biden fraudulent votes.  Hopefully, Arizona will do an audit on the machines as Col. Phil Waldron the key witness suggested to ascertain if fraud was committed.  Can't believe the media did not cover this man's testimony.

        https://gnews.org/605134/


      https://hubstatic.com/15294882.jpg

      1. savvydating profile image95
        savvydatingposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Right. Those who have been paying attention have known about this fiasco (and the massive fraud) all along. I wish you would have opened with this news instead of the other.

        This is why Republicans always lose. They are ever polite and fair, unlike Democrats, who go for the jugular and don't mind destroying lives, frankly..

        No one here is paying attention to your latest newsfeed now... although a few of the usual Biden (mostly female trolls) may show up to relieve their boredom as usual....

        But for the record, these current hearings are preliminary. No one expects the Democrat judges to agree with anything, but the evidence has to be presented. It is a process.

        But emge is correct. There is not much time. There NEVER was. That is why Trump's lawyers work day and night. Trump won. Biden did not. The evidence is already there.

        What is most important now is that Republicans win the Senate. (Georgia) If we lose that, Biden will pack the courts. Our system of checks and balances will disappear. One half of the country's vote will no longer count in future elections.

        This fight is not for Trump; It is for America. That is why Giuliani and his Team continue to fight, unlike most Republicans. As for "conservatives" here they may as well be Democrats.

        That is not a compliment, nor do I expect them to care.

        But, I do wish that Republicans here would stop acting like apologists for Democrats... because in case you haven't noticed yet, our Republic is at stake.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image85
          Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          It is well evident that most here don't have the stomach to face what is truly going on in our Government.   I have made it a point to post relevant blatant problems the country is facing. And I hear crickets or see my thread merely flipped to another subject.   And yes I agree with you some here that confess to being conservatives walk a careful line. 

          I am with you in believing our Republic is deeply threatened. And what's is more shocking it looks like a majority of Americans could care less...  What the hell happened to our society?

          1. GA Anderson profile image92
            GA Andersonposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            I won't watch Hannity, but I did watch the youtube videos of his three whistleblowers.

            The truck driver is doubtful in my mind. He claimed to be able to see information on the ballets. That doesn't seem credible to me. If ballots are being loaded by the pallot, I doubt they would be loaded in uncovered boxes that would allow him to see the actual ballets.

            The girl that spoke of disputed ballots being arbitrarily attributed to Biden does seem credible. My next question would be the degree of scope. Is she talking about several ballots or thousands of ballots? Whether several or thousands, it is a problem if true. But unless she is talking about thousands, (tens of thousands?), if wouldn't change the outcome.

            The ballot worker guy . . . seems to be like the woman. If his story is true it is a problem. But, the reference to hundreds of thousands of votes seems pretty iffy.

            I am not adamant that there were no election irregularities, but I am skeptical there were enough to change the results.

            GA

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              That's about where I fall, too.  No doubt there was some "election irregularities" (fraud), but skeptical there was enough to change the results.

              But that doesn't mean that my skepticism, or anyone else's, is sufficient reason not to thoroughly investigate.  The "whys" and "wherefores" of those crying out to NOT investigate are a enigma to men.

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                Just wondering who said election irregularities should not be investigated? Investigation is warranted. Proclaiming massive voter fraud and that the election results are wrong, as Trump has done and is still doing, is not only not warranted, it is a self-serving lie designed to keep his supporters riled up and the money rolling in. I pity those who keep giving money to the com man.

                I'm watching him on TV right now, proclaiming massive fraud in multiple states. ".....very bad criminal stuff."  "....the most fraudulent election ever."  "....a rigged election."

                So pathetic.

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Is it as pathetic as denying there was massive fraud without ever investigating the possibility?  Is it as pathetic as actions designed to stop investigations?  Is it as pathetic as lies that Trump filed 30+ suits, all thrown out of court? 

                  I think so.  The left's insistence that there IS no fraud and thus no need to investigate witness claims is pathetic.  Some of Rudy's claims look to me like simple spin and/or exaggeration.  An effort to make something look far worse than it is.  But some of them, if true, indicate fraud (whether falling under the legal definition or not) on a massive scale.  They should NOT be set aside and ignored because "We know there is no fraud", without ever checking into the allegations.

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                    PrettyPantherposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                    You still didn't tell me who said election irregularities should not be investigated, yet you repeated the assertion.

                    The reality is they are being investigated and no massive fraud has been found. You, oddly enough, don't seem to care that Trump makes unfounded assertions, yet fully engage the famous "Wilderness Nitpick Mode" for those who rightly declare there is no evidence of massive fraud.  At what point will you begin to feel silly?

              2. Sharlee01 profile image85
                Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

                Skeptical --- relating to the theory that certain knowledge is impossible. Really, have we become a country where it's impossible to get to the truth? Is falling back on being susceptible wise at this point?

                I ask what if there are more than enough to right this election? What If...

            2. Sharlee01 profile image85
              Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

              As a rule, I don't watch any talk jocks...  But it is unfortunate Hannity is the only one covering these hearings, and interviewing witnesses.  They have literally seconds to tell a bit of what they saw.  I in no way going to take the time to defend these whistleblowers, although I could...  These people hundreds of them have stepped up to tell what they saw. They are pretty dam brave if you ask me. People that stepped up to monitor our election.  They got off their butts and did,  not just talked about what was done as we are doing. 

                I watched the actual hearings live online. These three that I mentioned were much more descriptive of what they saw when speaking in front of the hearing's oath.    The witness Retired Army Col. Phil Waldron that gave testimony in regard to the Dominion voting machine was very clear about what these machines could do, and what he felt they did by following how the numbers jumped severely in a short given time span. He has asked to have access to them and claims he can prove his there if it was conducted.  He feels the fraud is up in the hundreds of thousands in the states where he saw the swings take place within a very short time. The fraud is done very quickly and the system will show dumps.

              I don't feel it would be wise for me to get into any detailed discussion of what I have watched in these hearings. It would land on deaf ears,
              not many are actually interested in hearing what went on or will go on from this election on. And for the Media crickets --- It's all out there if one has the fortitude to look.

              Let's just assume the numbers won't change anything, nice and easy is it not? This attitude is just one of the reasons we needed a Trump at this time in our history.  We have become so logical it is now biting us in our asses. Frustrating, true, and funny. 

              Savvy --- "But, I do wish that Republicans here would stop acting like apologists for Democrats... because in case you haven't noticed yet, our Republic is at stake."

              \

    3. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Friday, December 4, 2020
      FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
      Legislative Leaders call for audit of Maricopa
      County election software and equipment

      https://www.azleg.gov/press/house/54LEG … NAUDIT.pdf

      1. savvydating profile image95
        savvydatingposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

        Sharlee... Thanks for the link. Let's see if the audit happens. It would be a much needed step, to say the least. The rest of the action must occur through the judicial branch, as you well know.

        As an aside, I realize this year has been hell... For the record, I've appreciated your research on Biden. That's only the half of it. Biden is corrupt through and through. He said himself, "I am willing to prostitute myself."

        He meant it then. He means it today.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image85
          Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

          I did do tons of research on Biden, starting as far back as the internet would cooperate...  To be kind it was not at all pretty. I find it so unbelievable this man was elected, a man that did not campaign, and has nothing to offer.

          In regard to Biden's corruption. I felt the Bobuliski allegations were very compelling, and shocking. He presented very good evidence of the dirty dealings of the Biden family.   I am very hopeful the FBI will do their job in regards to Hunter, Joe, and the rest involved. I ask myself --- what the hell next?

          1. savvydating profile image95
            savvydatingposted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

            Sharlee, for my part, I no longer have any confidence whatsoever in the FBI or the DOJ, William Barr.

            There are very few truly brave people in this world who are willing to do the right thing. Even lawyers, willing to work for Trump, have quit because their families lives and their own have been threatened by powerful Democrats who will make good on their promises to destroy.

            Right now, winning Georgia... as I mentioned before, is of the utmost importance. Otherwise, our Republic is lost.

            BTW, Here is Warnock, who is running for Senate in Georgia: He is much like Obama's Reverend Wright, who hated America...

            https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/georgia-d … nate-race/

    4. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      News 12/6/20 ---  A Michigan judge is allowing a forensic investigation of 22 Dominion vote tabulation machines in rural Antrim County amid claims that votes there were compromised. This investigation in my opinion should help provide facts in one way or another... So, pleased to hear this news. 

      So back to the subject for a moment. If this investigation shows serious voter fraud or computer errors, does this move, Trump, closer to being heard in the Supreme Court?

      If neither is confirmed, do you think he will drop his fight, and move on?

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump- … n-machines

      https://www.record-eagle.com/news/court … f1bea.html

      https://hubstatic.com/15300419.jpg

  2. MG Singh profile image63
    MG Singhposted 6 weeks ago

    Trump must have a shot at the Supreme Court but I wonder whether the Court will overturn the election. But sitting a bit far I do see so many anomalies in the election but.....?

  3. emge profile image79
    emgeposted 6 weeks ago

    Trump is running out of time and whatever he has to do he better do it fast..

    1. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 6 weeks agoin reply to this

      Did you catch the whistleblowers on Hannity last night? Their accounts of firsthand voter fraud were riveting, and these citizens are being ignored as are their allocations.   If this form of fraud is ignored we have now no need to vote...  The media is just not reporting their allegations. They need to be heard.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMLx0BsRQ9E

  4. MG Singh profile image63
    MG Singhposted 5 weeks ago

    This is the last hurrah  for Trump.  He better move fast as time is not on his side. Let the SC decide the legality of the election. What next?

    1. Sharlee01 profile image85
      Sharlee01posted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      Yes, time is not on his side. What a horrible shame it is not...Our Government promoted a two year bogus Russia investigation... But we have no time when it comes to voter fraud allegations from hundreds of citizens. This is disgusting. We are talking about our voting system, one I no longer trust.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://maven.io/company/pages/privacy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)