It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 11:05:33 AM UTC-5, jack wrote:Again, what's your point here? How can they be tried on the basis of their "merits" when the courts say they have no merits.
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 7:28:44 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:What court said that the case had no merits? AFAIK they were all dismissed for things like laches.
On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 11:05:33 AM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
Again, what's your point here? How can they be tried on the basis of their "merits" when the courts say they have no merits.How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 1:00:48 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:The cases were all submitted timely and shown to be unworthy. If 63 legal teams all committed laches, that's pretty bad lawyering.
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 7:28:44 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 11:05:33 AM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
What court said that the case had no merits? AFAIK they were all dismissed for things like laches.Again, what's your point here? How can they be tried on the basis of their "merits" when the courts say they have no merits.How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 11:43:15 PM UTC-4, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:Please site which particular case was shown to be unworthy?
On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 1:00:48 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 7:28:44 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 11:05:33 AM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
The cases were all submitted timely and shown to be unworthy. If 63 legal teams all committed laches, that's pretty bad lawyering.What court said that the case had no merits? AFAIK they were all dismissed for things like laches.Again, what's your point here? How can they be tried on the basis of their "merits" when the courts say they have no merits.How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:48:23 PM UTC-4, jack wrote:None, since no merits were shown to the various courts.
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 11:43:15 PM UTC-4, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 1:00:48 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 7:28:44 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 11:05:33 AM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
Please site which particular case was shown to be unworthy?The cases were all submitted timely and shown to be unworthy. If 63 legal teams all committed laches, that's pretty bad lawyering.What court said that the case had no merits? AFAIK they were all dismissed for things like laches.Again, what's your point here? How can they be tried on the basis of their "merits" when the courts say they have no merits.How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
I said "things like" not that all the cases were dismissed for laches.
Which of the cases was tried on the merits?
On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 4:26:16 PM UTC-4, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:Right, because the cases were dismissed before they got to the merits.
On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 4:48:23 PM UTC-4, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 11:43:15 PM UTC-4, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Thursday, March 11, 2021 at 1:00:48 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021 at 7:28:44 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 11:05:33 AM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 8:45:44 AM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 12:06:36 PM UTC-5, jack wrote:
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 2:25:51 PM UTC-5, the...@bigmailbox.net wrote:
It seems that there isn't going to be a decision based on the merits. Dismissed as being moot.
That really is some fine boot strapping. Who set the date for this case?
Thomas dissented.
"One wonders what this Court waits for. We failed to settle this dispute before the election, and thus provide clear rules. Now we again fail to provide clear rules for future elections. The decision to leave election law hidden beneath a shroud of doubt is baffling. By doing nothing, we invite further confusion and erosion of voter confidence. Our fellow citizens deserve better and expect more of us."
None, since no merits were shown to the various courts.Please site which particular case was shown to be unworthy?The cases were all submitted timely and shown to be unworthy. If 63 legal teams all committed laches, that's pretty bad lawyering.What court said that the case had no merits? AFAIK they were all dismissed for things like laches.Again, what's your point here? How can they be tried on the basis of their "merits" when the courts say they have no merits.How can you tell if the cases have merit if none of the cases have been tried on the merits? Bootstrappy? I've heard it's now 63 times although I haven't verified it and I suspect dismissed for laches. Can you please point out if any of the cases have been tried on the merits?If they had any merit, the cases would have been heard. Refusing to believe that your side can be ruled against 62 times and you keep on believing the fault is not your own; that's cognitive dissonance.Were any of those cases decided on the merits? Does it matter how many cases there are if none were decided on the merits? Is it just me complaining? It seems at least one SCOTUS Justice thinks this was a bad idea too. Fair elections? I think you meant Fortified elections. Please explain what you meant by cognitive dissonance in this particular case.I wonder what will happen when voters have no faith in elections and no faith in the courts to resolve disputes.That's what, 62 cases resolved in favor of the fair 2020 elections? In cases of extreme cognitive dissonance, I guess you could have of hundreds of cases go against and you'll continue to complain.
I said "things like" not that all the cases were dismissed for laches. Which of the cases was tried on the merits?
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 63 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 492981:18:10 |
| Calls: | 840 |
| Files: | 1,301 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (1,660K bytes) |
| Messages: | 265,476 |