tadmjones

Any federal property and any interstate transportation, I believe. I don't think 'unconstitutional' is the barrier it once was.

As with the case in the Wisc Supreme , Dr Linda Lee Tarver’s testimony at the Michigan hearings point to long standing problems with Michigan elections and Detroit in particular for decades. Systemic problems with partisan control of elections isn’t anything new , calling it out and focusing broad attention on it can at least be a positive , going forward as they say. My hope was Trump could be an unapologetic American muckraker. Too much muck and apparently Maoists

Slogans can’t be empty they’re more like verbal memes, the ideas they point to may be empty or devoid of intellectual merit , but an empty slogan would not be recognizable as slogan , no? Antiestablishment is pretty much the appeal of Trump, the ‘voice of the forgotten ‘ the diminishing middle class. Trumpism is a national populist movement, how is that not antiestablishment? The Establishment threw everything they had at Trump for years and just barely beat him, I’d say the jury’s out but it never really sat. A little birdie is saying the author of the article cited up thread ,

The two major parties run the elections there is coordination on a national level, one precinct boss can’t affect a national election but a broader body can have effects through precincts. The DNC didn’t want Bernie and they didn’t get him and the RNC didn’t want Trump in 2016 but had to go with him anyway.

et Which chamber is more powerful? Perhaps the fraudsters timeframe is longer than one or even two cycles and given most of the mechanisms alleged to have employed not the first cycle they may have been used. The optics? , how many new members voted to impeach?or those more neoconish? Not to mention is/would this cycle be one to expect to see a split ticket electorate? What if the mechanics of manipulation only conferred advantages or opportunities to affect the top of the tickets? And Joe Biden , Joe Biden? Most presidential votes ever? Man that’s a lot of Bernie bros. Breaki

This article doesn’t at all touch on the unique and extraordinary character of a one of a kind , first time ever, unlike any other election, election. There are non irrational arguments that point to irregularities and there hasn’t been any well publicized extraordinary efforts to demonstrate serious effort was expended on securing the elections.If fact there are a lot of questions of the actions on officials in charge of a number of polling places , especially concerning chain of custody of the extraordinary number of mail / paper ballots . The narrative the article speaks to is on

Every user of Parler? The report that Curt Shilling had his homeowners insurance coverage cancelled because of social media posts. Another report of a former staffer to Trump that was fired because NHL refused to do business with the company if they employed that specific employee for the reason of his Trump association.

doug morris I did originally qualify my hyperbole “barely hyperbolic “ :) And by public or very public I was insinuating online/social media presence. I doubt my butcher would banish me from his store if a conversation turned to the happenings at the Capitol and we explored the nuisances of the proper description/context. So perhaps my statements overshot a specific mark , but the volley is in the right direction, no?

doug morris It was more an inclination thing, I just blurted out some anti-Trump zeitgeist with some vaguely real world examples. Do you mean to have me clarify my points just for clarification purposes or do you disagree with the gist ?

Sedition is the incitement/organization, insurrection would the acts of violence against 'the govt' and its agents.

Are you sure about that , I mean you did take the time to post that correction.

Sure as long you say burning police cars and attacking federal buildings are acts of insurrection, and it’s really only a misdemeanor now.

No need , gotcha. You keep implying that every allegation was fraudulent in and of itself every one. Every case being not heard was a legitimate consequence and that every judge or body made legally consistent arguments against every case ,every one. As an example this particular suit and any relief that may have been granted to the campaign was relatively inconsequential as far as the national results. Irrespective of Trump as candidate, an objective reading of the decision and the opinions of the dissenters was rather illuminating in electoral law cases , at least for this layman

Diligence ? Arbitrary? You haven’t read the opinions ?

Laches was used to refuse to hear the allegations. The appeal was quashed, the claims weren't adjudicated on their merits. The case wasn't decided on law , it was regicide.