Sans doute pour ça que les avocats de Mononk n'ont aucune stratégie valide: ils font n'importe quoi et voient ce qui marche (i.e., à peu près rien).spin-up a écrit : 13 nov. 2020, 22:30Pour croire que Trump est peut etre le vainqueur légitime il faut croire toutes les affirmations suivantes:
Passages amusants:
"“They’re throwing the kitchen sink against the wall to see what sticks — a mixed metaphor that’s deserving of this legal strategy. And ‘legal strategy’ should be in quotes,” said Ben Ginsberg, a veteran Republican election law attorney who headed the famed Florida recount team that ultimately led to George W. Bush becoming president.
Ginsberg chuckled at one hapless Michigan lawyer who filed an election challenge Thursday evening in a federal claims court in Washington, D.C., the wrong venue, and bizarrely titled it, “Donald Trump v. USA,” as if the president was suing the nation.
“Why would anyone ever use that title?” Ginsberg wondered, speculating that Trump’s lawyers are trying to “appease their client” by filing the suits that have little prayer of succeeding because, “they don’t have instances of fraud or irregularities that are relevant.”
[...]
In Montana, federal Judge Dana Christensen had harsher words for yet another team of Trump lawyers who were trying to stop mail-in voting in October when he called the claims widespread voter fraud “fiction.” And two days after the election in Michigan, federal Judge Cynthia Stephens rejected yet another lawsuit.
“Come on, now!” she admonished the lawyers at one point during a hearing. In her opinion, she referred to the campaign’s argument as “inadmissible hearsay within hearsay.”
The courts have been unsympathetic to the conspiracy theories and lack of evidence presented in Nevada, where judges all the way to the state Supreme Court have swiftly rejected Trump campaign arguments. A GOP-produced list of allegedly illegal voters in the state turned out to be legal voters who were soldiers, sailors and their spouses stationed elsewhere. A Nevada woman’s claim of voter fraud also proved so meritless that a federal judge rejected another Trump lawsuit."
Bref, les allégations sans fondement du roi de l'esbroufe et de ses suiveux ne convainquent personne de moindrement éveillé*. Ses tracasseries juridiques ont été stoppées en Pennsylvanie (où ils ont eu leur seule "victoire"). Lui-même a vaguement fait allusion à la possibilité d'un changement de gouvernement. S'il veut continuer à régner, il va peut-être falloir qu'il déclare la sécession de Mar-a-Lago
Jean-François
* Fait notable, certains des avocats représentant Sa Déviance POTUS 45 ont bien précisé à la cours qu'ils n'essayaient pas de plaider qu'il y a eu fraude. Et même:
"Then, just before midnight Friday, Goldstein’s firm of Porter Wright Morris & Arthur dropped Trump’s campaign as a client, a rare move that underscores how fraught the quixotic case was for the firm’s reputation."
Faut croire qu'ils ne partageaient pas l'enthousiasme de leur client pour le mensonge. Et ils ne devraient pas être les seuls car:
''Gross said the lawsuits are so groundless that the lawyers are more likely to be sanctioned for pursuing them than to succeed in court."
Même l'administration Trump reconnait que l'élection était la plus sécurisée.
) mais qu'il avait aussi gagné en nombre de voix si on ne comptait que les bulletins légaux (ce qui était bien sûr faux).
