Weather: Abundant sunshine. Near record high temperatures. High 77F.
-5 New covid cases in Lakewood totals 6228/213
-Senator Lindsey Graham: There is evidence of 6 dead people who registered to vote in Pennsylvania after they died. If republicans dont challenge or change the election system there will never be a republican president elected again
- Hanochas Even Hapina Meon High school Bnos Melech elementary 550 James 2:30 pm
-Trump: “We believe these people are thieves. The big city machines are corrupt. This was a stolen election. Best pollster in Britain wrote this morning that this clearly was a stolen election, that it’s impossible to imagine that Biden outran Obama in some of these states. (Per councilman Chaim Deutsch the pottery shop, owned by a single mom of five. With no income coming into her “red zone” business, the owner was harassed while preparing craft kits to sell for the upcoming holiday.)
-Murphy: We’re still in the middle of a pandemic and need everyone to take this seriously.
-Eric Trump retweets: Last night Thousands of JoeBiden supporters including Bill deBlasioc chuck schumer are dancing on the streets squeezed together like sardines, 5 miles down the road NYS agents are handing out COVID fines to struggling Jewish shop owners in Brooklyn
- Melania Trump refutes rumors she's pushing the president to concede: "The American people deserve fair elections. Every legal - not illegal - vote should be counted. We must protect our democracy with complete transparency".
-Trump tweets: We should look at the votes. We’re just beginning the tabulation stage. We should look at these allegations. We’re seeing a number of affidavits that there has been voter fraud. We have a history in this country of election problems. In
Pennsylvania you had an order by a. Supreme Court Justice to compel them to separate ballots that were received after the legislative deadline. It required the intervention of Justice Alito. That’s a large group of ballots. When you talk about systemic problems, it’s about... how these ballots were authenticated, because if there’s a problem in the system about authentication, that would seriously affect the ENTIRE ELECTION - And what concerns me is that we had over a hundred million mail-in ballot in cites like Philladelphia...and Detroit with a long series of election problems (to put it mildly).” @JonathanTurley
So the 'best pollster' in Britain is suddenly an authority?
ReplyDeleteThe worst part is, that Yidden who learned Torah, who know how to parse a Rashi and how to understand the conceptual underpinnings of a Rashba, fall for the drivel of this president. Those who like his policies, fine. But don't fall for the nonsense that he sells on his twitter account, fahr a gut yuhr.
There is no reason to believe fraud, none at all
Even Biden said we'll wait until all the votes are counted. What changed?
Deletethe best way to make an argument is to personally insult those who disagree with you.
DeleteObviously you weren't following closely, he was ahead in all those states and some substantialy and suddenly votes appeared after the deadline and of course no one was allowed to supervise the counting and this is legit? do you know how to learn a Rashi?
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't ahead, he thought he was ahead, because they couldn't count the mail-in ballots. As was warned before the elections.
DeleteIt's like having the first two lottery numbers and thinking you are ahead, and you got cheated when the other numbers didn't come out right.
What did Mabuto and what have all those little petty dictators say when forced to stand election?
ReplyDeleteThank goodness for federalism and the sovereignty of state governments to protect the integrity of our republic.
What a disgrace that the shinning beacon, America, has a president acting like an authoritarian leader.
The results of this election were the best possible outcome and will bring this nation back to the center. We do not need sweeping legislation and do not want radical change. We want civility, a handle on the pandemic, and an end to the demonization of our fellow countrymen. A split Congress and an experienced establishment politician in the White House, will ensure that no extreme on the right or left will prevent the nation from returned to its natural center. As for those of you who thought Bidden will have to pander to one group of another, in a way, Bidden might be thankful that the Republicans retained the Senate.
There is a story about when Jefferson returned from France and visited George Washington. Jefferson complained about the Senate having, then, unelected six year terms. He started pouring his tea into his saucer and Washington asked why he did that. Jefferson, of course, said to cool off the tea. Washington answered, same with the Senate, to cool off the passion of the people. Yes, we know the Senate was a result of the Connecticut compromise, but as Franklin said after the constitutional convention, like when the looked at the document, you would have thought it was written coherently by a single mind (well versed in history and political science). Our system of government, forged out of compromise, is truly remarkable.
Who said the Republicans won the Senate? At best right now it's split even. Kamala is the tie breaker. Clean sweep, Dems. Not looking good for the moral middle of this Country.
Deleteanonymous 12:21
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how someone who thinks he understands the underpinnings of a Rashba can fall for all of the MSM lies and deceits. There is so much fraud in this election but of course not being covered by MSM. In one county in Michigan the computers had a glitch where it flipped 6000 Trump votes to Biden. Now that same software is being used in 47 counties in Michigan and in 30 states. Do you think there may be a problem!? Also numerous documented cases of dead people registering to vote after they died and voting for Biden. Also all the documented cases of not letting the observers from Republicans observe the opening and checking for signatures and other things that are required on ballots. I guess all of this must be fictional according to your learned opinion. I'm glad you are not adjudicating any real world problems and I further hope you never get to be in position to adjudicate anything.
12:21
ReplyDeleteThe best pollster in Britain has no direct negios as he doesnt belong to any US political party. So Trump is right on the mark for quoting him
Get it now?
I bet all you people think we never landed on the moon, that the mafia killed Kennedy, that the CIA made Reagan president, that Obama was not born in the US, that John Wilkes Booth did not kill Lincoln.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Supreme Court, Trump's fantasies will never reach it. Elections are matters of state law. Bush v. Gore was an aberration. At any rate, he has to go to district court first, then to the appellate courts. The Supreme Court will not touch this except for the after the fact PA case which is now moot.
We had enough with the activist judges. First the Grisswold case in 1963 creating the right of privacy. The the Warren Court applying the Bill of Rights to the state through the 14th amendment. Then Kennedy with the alternate lifestyles. Then Scalia with the second amendment. There is no such thing as a conservative or liberal judge. There is only activist judges or judges like the great Felix Frankfurter that allow democracy to play itself out without nine people making political decisions for the nation. The 14 amendment was never intended to create new right or to apply the Bill of Rights to the states. The Bill of Right was adopted to prevent a strong central government (third amendment because of Quartering Act of Parliament, Fourth Amendment because of Coercive Acts allowing writs of assistance, Fifth Amendment as a basic right of due process and for example to prevent cases like Sir Walter Raleigh who could not confront his accusers etc.)
BTW I was published in the Dartmouth Law Journal in 2012 with an article claiming that the whole idea of substantive due process that the activist judges like Earl Warren, Kennedy, Scalia and the rest who create new right under the due process clause, was invented by John Calhoun when he said Congress cannot ban slavery in the territories because of the due process right of property (Can you believe that! How many people will tell you that?)It is the same thing, Lochner and the 1895 -1937 Court that created the right of privacy to protect business and property rights and the Girisswold, Roe v. Wade, Lawrence v Texas right of privacy in the home. It is all made up by judges and was never intended under the due process clause. That is also how the Court incorporates the Bill of Rights. So Scalia and the rest are no different when they incorporated the Second Amendment. None of the amendments were ever intended against the states. The states have their own constitutions. The intent of the 14th amendment was to give the freed slave rights, but not to create new rights. Justice Black was wrong to say it was intended to incorporate the Bill of Rights and every historian knows it.
To explain why the Court will be activist to take an election case, it will be based, again on the 14th amdendment, and perhaps 15th with voting rights. Both obviously to give freed slaves rights including voting rights. But the dreamers on the Court will say that since every vote has to be equal, so it is not equal make one voters ballot due on Tuesday and the other on Friday, which is a bunch of poppycock having nothing to do with the 14th or 15th amendment. It is the same garbage as when the Court said in Grisswald that Third Amendment, Quartering of Troops, and the searches and seizures in the Fourth Amendment, give off a "penumbra" (as if it were mysticism) of privacy, therefore a state cannot ban birth control, and afterward, Roe v. Wade, abortion. Then somes along Kennedy with that line for same gender marriage. So we went from banning the federal army from quartering troop to same gender marriage. Same with the Bill of Rights. Read the Miranda case, it is nothing more than psycho-babble. No legal citations, just mysticism. So not only the federal Fifth Amendment ban on self-incrimination applies to the states, but the cop needs to read your rights and if he does not, a piece of garbage like Maranda goes free. It is all nonsense. The Court has no right intruding into elections, no right to tell the states they cannot enforce morality, tell the states they cannot ban guns etc. The great Professor Thayer (1898), the rebbe of Holmes, Brandeis, and Frankfurter, the three greatest men to sit on the Court, questioned the source of the idea of ruling a law unconstitutional (it was actually the NJ Supreme Court when the legislature passed a law requiring a six person jury to confiscate land from collaborators with the British). The rule that Holmes, Bradeis and Frankfurter settled upon, since the First Amendment was already incorporated, was if a law was so repugnant that no free people would consider it and has never been considered in American history, it would be unconstitutional. It seems that free speech largely fit into that. Believe it or not, the court still uses Holmes's and Frankfurter's standard! But they pervert it. It is hard to see that a law against abortion is repugnant to the concept of freedom as understood in our history. It is also hard to understand Scalia, how a state banning firearms is repugnant to any free people. Cities have alway been understood to ban weapons. I though people in England were free. And reading the opinions of the justice, they were ready to throw out this standard and revive the old ridiculous idea that privileges and immunities give judges the right to make whatever law they want, but did not go that far. And that is from a "conservative" court.
DeleteBottom line, whether conservative like Scalia, or liberal like Earl Warren, it is the same. These activist judges put their own policy beliefs into the constitution, in contrast to great men like Holmes, Brandies, and Frankfurter. The idea is, like the Chief Justice in the Affordable Care Act, find a way to uphold an act of Congress because when the Court strikes down a law, no matter how smart or convincing the opinion, in hindsight, it is nothing more than judicial legislation.
Regardless of where you were published, your lack a basic command of the English language.
DeleteActive, is not the same as activist. If Congress or a President continually flaunts the Constitution, that may necessitate the Supreme Court to be very active, their job as the 3rd branch of the government is to protect the Constitution. That does not make them activist's.
Activist by definition "a person who campaigns to bring about political or social change". That is when a court goes beyond what is proscribed in the constitution to inject their personal beliefs in their rulings or to legislate from the bench.
Justice Roberts redefining Obamacare as a tax, when the legislatures who passed the law, specifically said it was not a tax, and their was no language in the bill describing it as a tax would be a perfect example.
Another example, would be the courts defining what marriage is, when marriage has historically been a religious construct. Their is nothing in the Constitution that describes marriage, or that gives judges the ability to do so.
These would be activist decisions
-Senator Lindsey Graham: There is evidence of 6 dead people who registered to vote in Pennsylvania after they died. If republicans dont challenge or change the election system there will never be a republican president elected again
ReplyDeleteWhat a pikeach!
Six whole people voted from the grave, according to 'evidence'. He doesn't even know for whom they voted, but he knows that the problem is not that the elections are compromised, but that republicans won't be able to be elected. He doesn't even know yet whose fraud it was, so why will it affect republicans more than democrats?
This guy is a moron, who needs someone to teach him the ואני again
look who is pushing the problematic method of voting... look who is pushing for a lack of transparency … the main issues we are seeing are in the big crime ridden cities that vote overwhelmingly democrat.. Republican are for voting with ID hence ensuring integrity , democrats are anti... I wonder why??
Delete