I'm not exactly clear as to the train of thought, or even what case/issue the SC should hear out. The "case" argued in public is nothing like anything presented in any court. It isn't like Trump's lawyers weren't given an opportunity. Q. Are you alleging fraud? A. No. Well OK then. You can't then go to the PA supreme court and allege fraud. When the PA supreme court declines to let you, you can't go to the SC and do the same. They will rightly tell you to pound sand. This basic script played out over and over again.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 3:49 PM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > If I'm following Steve's train of thought: he's saying giving the issue a > day in court might convince some people that justice was done more > effectively than simply dismissing the case. An independent judiciary > shouldn't have to consider political angles like that. The cases are being > dismissed because they lack standing and/or lack merit. If that doesn't > convince people, then neither would taking the case to court and losing > it. > > > >>>
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
