A court isn’t going to say the executive branch can do whatever they want. That bit seems pretty clearly added for emphasis by you 😂

But was that the one that was worded that way? I don’t recall which one it was.

Obviously I added that emphasis. But that was the impression I got from their wording (unless I’m mixing up states). It seems that they gave the executive the same latitude federal agencies have which is very broad as long as they remain within the confines of the statute.

troll kraken troll kraken is that a personal thing

I am not sure what wording you are referring to... The larger point is that the legislatures allowed for emergency measures to be enacted. Here in CA, the governor indicated his intention to allow universal mail-in and the legislature responded by passing a law to make sure there was no ambiguity with overwhelming bipartisan support.

They said if you are taking issue with changes to how the election is run file them beforehand you can’t wait to see the election results then throw out votes cast following the rules in place and also the state legislature isn’t allow to just throw out election results because their candidate didn’t win. Pretty reasonable

ITS HAPPENING

WWG1WGA

I might have my SC opinions mixed up. Either way, CA may have done that but many haven’t.

Yeah that’s not the same thing I was talking about so I could have mixed them up.

If they brought a suit before the election would they have had standing?

If you file it before or after an election you have to do it properly. They seem to be struggling with doing that in both cases. They lost some prior to election because they were unable to show harm prior to election

So how does that work? If harm is prospective, do you always lack standing beforehand?

Giuliani claims it’s impossible. Yet somehow the Dems lawyers managed to win cases before and after. I think they just need to get their crap together

It seems like it is if you’re trying to stop a rule change. How did the Dems have standing to bring a suit beforehand? Is it because it’s inherent to their case that the rule must be changed prior to the election? And why wouldn’t that rationale apply for the other side?

My questions are somewhat rhetorical. I don’t expect answers to everything.

Hm well Georgia the executive was implementing changes between general and runoffs and Dems went in and won the cases. I don’t know the details of how they presented it differently just that it seems possible. It seems though you can have a case and present it in a right or poor way and lose the case on poor laywering

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/horned-d-c-protester-makes-first-court-appearance-refuses-to-eat-in-detention

The Q-Anon shaman, arrested on Friday after turning himself in, has refused to eat food provided in the federal facility he is being held in because he only eats "a strict shamanic diet of pure organic food".

lmfao

best character of 2021

Hahahahahahhahaha

Thank you tech oligarchs. I need to be told what to think :/

Twitter purging fake bot accounts. Prepare for the entire right to turn into mad 13 year old girls that lost some fake followers her rich dad bought 😂

I don't understand.

There is no such thing as Qanon. Only Q or Anon.

A bunch of fake accounts were made to make right wing folks look popular. They are deleted. Now they will claim Twitter bots are part of their 1st amendment rights somehow

They don’t even hide it like maybe I should get some real people to make me not look bad using bots

😂🍿

Man...the bread I am having is amazing!

WARNING foul language https://lbry.tv/@bitcoinandfriends:a/bitcoin-and-friends-episode-2:1

@Bunga Poro share the recipe!

She is crying about followers.. she must need that attention

@blaisenguns you do need to be told, shame on you for thinking without approval

any1 recommend a cat breed that's affordable and can still get a kitten from a breeder?

they are free at most adoption centers

lol at taking Twitter at their word.

So let me get this straight. You believe 50k real conservative accounts were banned not bots and conservatives well know for stable well rationed responses to being silenced choose to say nothing about it?

No? I’m saying we have no reason to take Twitter’s word like gospel when they’re cleansing their platform of right wing accounts.

Can someone explain what Executive order 13595 is and how it works?

But only 1 was certified by a state official

I know. But I’m sure their interpretation of the rules would change. The Constitution is only flexible when it helps them.