Saturday, November 07, 2020

These People are Idiots

But the Mad King has a solution! Better sycophants! Trump doesn't want a James Baker; he wants a Roy Cohn. He wants his Bush v. Gore, his Florida recount. Yes, he's that stupid. He doesn't understand the first thing about the 2000 election, except the Supreme Court pulled Bush's fat out of the fire, and Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, and ACB owe Trump big time.  He just needs a lawyer to get it to the Supremes.

Except it won't work that way this time.  Bush and Gore were deadlocked.  Florida was the key to who won.  Biden is not going to lose Pennsylvania even if the Supremes block the counting of the "late" ballots (I'm not going into that again, but the number of ballots in question isn't enough to give Trump the win even if the Court gave them all to him.  And they wouldn't; all they would do is throw them out, and leave the status, quo.  Trump is literally too dumb to understand that.)  Recounts in Nevada or Wisconsin or Georgia or Michigan won't happen because of the varieties of state law make it impossible (one advantage of a decentralized system, you can't force a massive recount across the board.  Every state has its own rules, and we're back to the zombie legal theory Rehnquist raised from the dead and Kavanaugh re-animated, which says what the legislature says about presidential elections is inviolable.  IOW, Trump can't even get the Supremes to order a recount in any state per the legal theory everybody is worried about.).  

And this just in: Another repudiation. The hits just keep on coming.

There is no royal road to re-election, but who is going to tell Alexander that?  (it was geometry in his case, but anyway.)  I don't know, but I would pay money for a live web-cam in the room when that discussion is attempted.

Who is going to tell him his "legal team" is Giuliani and there non-lawyer clowns?  Well, and the lawyers who are actually willing to take the RNC money and go to court to spend it.  But you can't make bricks without straw, and you can't make fraud cases without evidence.
But these are not complex legal issues. There's simply no evidence of fraud, malfeasance, misfeasance, or even gross error. Even if there is, what does it change? The courts won't stop the counting of ballots (the deadline is in December), the courts can only dismiss sets of ballots based on evidence they are somehow invalid; the courts are not going to award the race to one party. Period. There is no "legit legal issue." I've known clients like Trump, who don't understand that. No one wants to work for them, elite lawyers or otherwise. Again: a decentralized system. Nevada won't have all the ballots in until next week. That's allowed under Nevada law. Overseas ballots from military and diplomatic personnel, or just citizens living overseas, have deadlines beyond Election Day in some states. Again: perfecly legal. But it means not all the votes are in by last Wednesday. Which is why AP, et al., are not calling NV or NC yet. Or Georgia or PA, for that matter. Abundance of caution after 2000, though nobody is saying that. Which would be fine, if King Lear weren't looking for a hurricane to rage in. Nicely put. There is nothing any court in the land is going to do to change any of those numbers substantively. Recounts, where allowed by law, might change them by 100 votes or less. Otherwise, consider them immutable. Favorite tweet of the day.
Others didn’t feel they had anything to explain or defend. “Don’t cry because it’s over. Smile because it happened,” a former White House official told me. “Live. Laugh. Love.” This person added, “Sometimes you own the libs; sometimes the libs own you.” 
Jeebus, these people are idiots.
Posted by at

2 comments:

  1. The Thought Criminal9:30 AM

    Lear had a fool to talk sense to him, Trump is his own fool. King George wasn't as mad as they made out and he had a lot less power than Trump. It is one of the ironic things about the United States that as soon as the Constitution was signed and the first election was held a lot of those who had thrown off the King or Britain tried to establish a presidential kingship. I've been rereading Charles Beard and Max Farrand (and others) who exposed a lot of the sleazy stuff they didn't tell us in high school civics or other epics in hagiographic lies. The process of ratification of the Constitution, according the the Declaration the only thing that could have made it legtimiate, was, even for the late 18th century, an obvious set-up job in which a tiny percentage of even eligible white-male-property-owning citizens participated. It was clearly rigged by the existing political elite, a tiny percentage even in places like New England and Virginia, to prevent widespread participation. The history of the United States is a struggle of The People against the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Craig2:12 PM

    I'm betting we'll get an encore from Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)