I'll note at the start that even if it were possible to even pretend to take this seriously, it's been a month since the case was first filed and they've still served nobody; no way do you get ex parte relief under those circumstances. Ever. Even if you're not a loon.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Anyway, let's look at the thing. I haven't yet - I forced myself to get through my writing first, and that did not go quickly or smoothly today. So let's see what we've got.
Show this thread -
-
Literally the only reason that this is not the one dumbest thing written in one of these lawsuits is that it comes from the pen of a lawyer who previously put the words "Gondor has no king" in a federal court filing.pic.twitter.com/gyLhzqcIYC
Show this thread -
-
OK. This still isn't as dumb as "Gondor has no king" but it's dumber than the heading was.pic.twitter.com/XjnL2PVBGi
Show this thread -
Class action claims for trespass to feels are not a thing. Still. At all.pic.twitter.com/PuOaxF7QWD
Show this thread -
The justification for getting rid of 2/3 of the Senate is still remarkably weak. Even by the standards of this case.pic.twitter.com/wd0fH3s8jm
Show this thread -
Plaintiffs are willing to post a bond in any amount the Court deems appropriate but the only appropriate amount is a nominal one is a great argument and one that's totally going to be persuasive I'm sure.pic.twitter.com/LeclHGOhez
Show this thread -
I'm out of even. I just can't. And that's not the only field upon which I grow things that's totally barren at this point. Just totally out.pic.twitter.com/modhqgAls0
Show this thread -
You're in severe mental anguish because you strongly suspect that the President wasn't legitimately elected but aren't sure? And they call US snowflakes?pic.twitter.com/MoYGEKcw5G
Show this thread -
You know, it's been a long week. This isn't making it shorter. Also, I doubt any of the 62% of Americans who think a 3rd party would be good have "a third party consisting of one federal judge who runs everything" in mind.pic.twitter.com/60Uz3aOHvi
Show this thread -
We're no better than a third-world depotism if a single federal judge doesn't use claimed-but-not-proven noncompliance with technical requirements for voting systems as an excuse to eliminate the entire existing government and you know now that you put it like that...pic.twitter.com/3Wmml5effe
Show this thread -
No comment here. Sorry, I'd like to be more snarky but the angst is just past the sell-by at this point - it's boring me.pic.twitter.com/1qkGcYQO1d
Show this thread -
Credit where due, as awful an argument as the whole "intense mental anguish" thing is - and it's really hard to overstate how terrible the argument is - it's at least (I think) one that Davis hasn't made before. So presumably he's realized how terrible the prior arguments were.pic.twitter.com/c6VxkDzAoV
Show this thread -
Also - firedtxlawyer needs to pack up his bigotry and take it the everlovingfuck out of this courtroom. The mere possibility that something you don't like might become law doesn't give you grounds to sue. Nor is that possibility an injury of any kind - irreparable or otherwise.pic.twitter.com/QMProJpa61
Show this thread -
Also, do not presume to speak for all Christians, Paul. You don't.
Show this thread -
Elections Have Consequences. One of those consequences is that the side that prevails gets to govern. Even if the other side doesn't like that.pic.twitter.com/9MBKsSHCh8
Show this thread -
-
Also, you're a Texan complaining about low oil prices. Doesn't that violate the state constitution or something?pic.twitter.com/ZAugIn5D8d
Show this thread -
Seriously, you seditious little twerp, "I don't like the results of the election" is not now, nor will it ever be, grounds for overthrowing the government.pic.twitter.com/emljeR0ixS
Show this thread -
The likelihood that the court will use Davis's law license for toilet paper is very very low. But it is vastly greater than the likelihood that the Plaintiffs will prevail on the merits - especially when Davis *STILL* hasn't explained the alleged HAVA violations with any clarity.pic.twitter.com/6PjVIX4JeM
Show this thread -
And, yes, I've been ignoring the footnotes for the most part. I saw that he unironically cited Dinesh the felon in one of them and I decided that I don't have the strength to go there on an otherwise-pleasant Friday afternoon.
Show this thread -
Seriously - if you want the court to see your key evidence, you never, ever say "go look at this pile of bat droppings." You need to point them to each and every individual thing there and use words to explain it.pic.twitter.com/j7eyBQSei1
Show this thread -
And, also seriously, you can't admit that maybe the law says that Leahy is acting President in a footnote or try to wave it away because you think that "complicity" somehow mandates expelling him from Congress WHICH COURTS CAN'T EVEN DO YOU UTTER BELL-ENDpic.twitter.com/YUekAR9uTj
Show this thread -
And I have no idea what this actually says but it reads a lot like "who cares if Leahy should be acting, you can just do whatever you want" which is much constitution.pic.twitter.com/JHo9ytOqWP
Show this thread -
Oh, good. Definitely don't explain anything you want in the motion, leave it all for the proposed order of course that's how you do that.pic.twitter.com/p9GqPhaSqE
Show this thread -
-
*Sigh* OK, I've got 30 minutes before I have to set up the stream. Let's look at the dumbass's proposed restraining order.
Show this thread -
It's here, for those playing along at home. For the nonlawyers, it's drafted as if the judge has made these findings. The judge has not and will not, but drafting it like that is as close to normal as this case will ever get.https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1123851/gov.uscourts.txwd.1123851.5.8.pdf …
Show this thread - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.