I’m not sure you got my point Cal. Namely that any legal case (and its evidence) has to be brought in the appropriate court, and can only escalate to a higher court on appeal. That appeal must be about the decision of the lower court (“the lower court has made a perverse decision given the evidence Mr Judge”) rather than introducing new evidence which the lower court was not presented with. In which case I don’t see how new evidence - or at least significantly new evidence - can be introduced at the Supreme Court. They need to get whatever compelling evidence they have into the legal system well before SCOTUS gets involved.
If the logic is 'vote for the wrong candidate and lose your job' I would say it's unequivocably wrong and undermines the democracy.
Fairly substantially as the coming days will demonstrate. CNN’s attempts to steer the narrative are also liable to imminent exposure. I barely remember much of the detail from my legal training but issues of fact, law and court competency in a Federal system provide multiple avenues for the inventive. The complaint only has to establish real doubt.
You are correct of course. However, if the story is real and not fake news, the owner of the company has to make the decision on who should stay and who should go. Whilst I don't agree with his approach, it I guess is down to him to make the final decision.
Of course. But so far they have failed in court to establish any doubt, presumably because their evidence has been less than convincing (or indeed presented). It feels a bit like Waiting For Godot...
Almost certainly not real. I meant to suggest that on my post. It is his decision but that also means he's accountable for it.
US attorney general finds 'no voter fraud that could overturn election' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-55153366
It’s unbelievable the sort of lawyer Trump employs... Chris Krebs, who headed the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, was fired last month after he disputed Mr Trump's fraud claims. The 2020 election "was the most secure in American history," he had said. On Monday, Trump lawyer Joe DiGenova drew swift condemnation after he called for violence against Mr Krebs. "Anybody who thinks the election went well," he told The Howie Carr Show podcast, "like that idiot Krebs who used to be the head of cybersecurity, that guy is a class A moron. "He should be drawn and quartered. Taken out at dawn and shot." That threat was condemned on Tuesday in a blistering tirade from Georgia's voting systems manager. Gabriel Sterling, a Republican, said Mr Trump would bear ultimate responsibility for any violence that results from the election fraud claims the president has stoked. .
Well, as an interested observer, I try to confine myself to ‘facts’; things that are within my own knowledge rather than a mere expression of personal opinion dressed up as more. (You can can legalistic about language and how allegations substantiated become evidence and evidence multiplied becomes proof.... Early in the process you arguably only ever have allegations without judicial findings of fact on evidence given under oath.) One incontrovertible ‘fact’ is that the ball is still very much in play with a volume of evidence yet to be tested. The next fortnight is key on the back of quasi-judicial hearings in State senates etc. There has of course been no substantial DoJ investigation; itself entirely understandable whatever ardent Republicans might think. I doubt that right now AG Barr wants to wade into something that could not be more politically contentious. Civil avenues remain open to resolve the election. Any criminal enquiry is therefore better paused for now as, allegedly, evidence is being gathered anyway - furthermore it would be naive to assume everything is in the public domain. So, we have no ‘proof’ unlike the recordings of senior CNN executives being released that show them rehearsing their political bias and editorial antagonism in order to shape the narrative. They were very mean about poor old Tucker Carlson.
Not according to Attorney General Barr himself: “There's been one assertion that would be systemic fraud and that would be the claim that machines were programmed essentially to skew the election results," Mr Barr, who is seen as a top Trump ally, told AP News on Tuesday, referring to the assertion that ballot machines were hacked to give more votes to Mr Biden. Mr Barr said that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security have investigated that claim, "and so far, we haven't seen anything to substantiate that". A DOJ spokesperson later stressed the department had not concluded its investigation and would continue to "receive and vigorously pursue all specific and credible allegations of fraud as expeditiously as possible". Last month, Mr Barr issued an order to US attorneys, allowing them to pursue any "substantial allegations" of voting irregularities, before the 2020 presidential election was certified.
I told you you were no lawyer. The operative words are ‘so far’. The political sensitivity at this juncture are obvious enough. Edit: Meant to add also ‘voter fraud’ not ‘voting fraud’. There is a more than subtle difference when you have to maintain public confidence. They could as readily be applied to Russell Stroup’s ‘no proven case’. Early days. Too early to draw conclusions either way but plenty of smoke. I am just watching with interest.
So much of this is about narrative and momentum. If Joe Biden said, “I’ve had enough drinking until Christmas” that’s how CNN would report it. If Trump said it CNN would report “I’ve had enough. Drinking until Christmas”
What The President should say is “All properly placed votes will be counted and I will accept the results”. That will never come out of this guys mouth. He pulls stuff out of his ass, puts mayonnaise on it and Republicans eat it like it’s the greatest, most tremendous sandwich in history. Just so you know, I’m 100% Independent and placed votes for 3 different parties in our election. I chose neither Biden or Trump, both horrible choices in my opinion.
I share your grief. Our last election was a choice between the lesser of two weevils. I just ask for objectivity because we have an imbalance of power where hidden financial and hostile interests are fiddling with the dials. The behaviour of politicians is both bizarre and corrupt.