If you thought he was doing that after he gave the defense do over time for no reason you're drinking rainbows for the morning coffee. Truth is, game was pozzed from the start.
Well, one of the harsher lessons to learn from all this is, despite what you'd expect from the profession, judges aren't as impartial as they should be, and it's a shame that a lot of this hedges on just a few people, assuming this all ends up going to SCOTUS.
I'm reading through this memo; here are some of my takeaways:
The pleading was amended after a landmark decision in the PASC established that only the General Assembly could sue for Electors and Elections Clauses-related damages; most counts were excised, leaving an Equal Protections-related count and an Electors and Elections Clauses-related count, the latter of which plaintiff stated they retained for the appeals (so, they expected this).
Plaintiffs, on an individual basis, allege they have standing because they were disenfranchised as a result of the SoS allowing counties to decide for themselves whether to cure ballots; the campaign alleges it has standing because of competition.
Only the former group has adequate standing, but the court asserts they can't prove that the Defendants caused their harm or that their harm can be remedied through blocking certification.
The campaign has no standing for the purposes of Equal Protection clause suits.
The court asserts that merely being a committee for a federal election candidate neither establishes standing or harm. It should be noted that the campaign referenced cases that established this as sufficient for standing; the court, in turn, 1) states that a candidate's committee and a party's state committee are not the same, and 2) that the campaign apparently tried-- and failed-- to establish this associational standing in federal court before.
Something sticks out: "In Cegavske (another case in which the Trump Campaign alleged violations of equal protection), the court found that the Trump Campaign failed to satisfy the second prong of associational standing because it “represents only Donald J. Trump and his ‘electoral and political goals’ of reelection.”64 That court noted that while the Trump Campaign might achieve its purposes through its member voters, the “constitutional interests of those voters are wholly distinct” from that of the Trump Campaign.65 No different here. Even if the Individual Plaintiffs attempted to vote for President Trump, their constitutional interests are different, precluding a finding of associational standing."
(At the risk of being pedantic, the court should have demonstrated why the Constitution is of no relevance to the campaign and why the plaintiffs voting for him doesn't implicate him.)
The campaign cites two cases in order to support their claim of "competitive standing", but the court asserts that "competitive standing" refers to the fundamental eligibility of a given candidate.
Scope this: "Individual Plaintiffs’ claims fail because it is perfectly rational for a state to provide counties discretion to notify voters that they may cure procedurally defective mail-in ballots." Keep in mind that ballot curing is illegal in Pennsylvania.
Regarding the remedy sought by plaintiff: the court doesn't view the remedy as a matter of addressing a compromised election system, but rather in terms of invalidating votes. The court may have been more inclined to compel counting of the votes of the individuals suing, but is not inclined to compel blocking certification, which it views as the disenfranchisement of millions of people. I find that interesting because plaintiff's argument appears to be that the culmination of errors in PA's general election already disenfranchised millions of voters and that, given the scale of ballots affected, the tallies are useless. To be sure, though, even granting this, you have to consider downballot races-- what do they do about all their other races?
Plaintiffs allege in some cases, their observers were not given "meaningful access", and in other cases they weren't even allowed to observe. The court notes there isn't a specific allegation that Republican observers specifically, unlike Democrat observers, were not allowed to observe, and as such this cannot be an Equal Protections clause violation.
I already made my peace with Trump going for the nuke.
Edit: As for the democrats, they get away with this steal, in 2024, even if Biden is a doddering old fool in a bathrobe unable to remember where is his head from his ass, the Republican will not win.
At the start of nazism suddenly lots of really nice apartments became available and cheap because upper and middle class jews started emigrating. By 1935 it wasn't possible to buy and sell stocks without permission. The nazi policy of financing everything with debt seems very similar to Modern Monetary Policy championed by the likes of AOC.
That's because the twin Bad Man ideologies of Fascism and National socialism were the original "tHaT wAsN't ReAl SoCiAliSm!" ideologies. When the Soviet Union utterly failed to usher in the prophesied glorious utopian future, Socialists across Europe went into overdrive trying to come up with a way to do it right. The Italians seized on the idea that the destruction of the nation-state was the problem, and so they created Fascism, while National Socialism took that hook and added the claim that Communism was a trap created by the Jews to catch people running away from Jewish Capitalism.
So hello first of all, i want to first greet all the fellow jebheads with my arrival in thia thread. Second of all what in the fuck is going on with this election? Is it over yet after soylord fucked em out of court or what ? Can someone please give me a small account on whats going.
so the judge in the pa case reccos individual voters to sue their counties to have their vote count instead of having all votes thrown out. he skips over the legality of ballot curing, which is not explicitly forbidden but can be said to be because of the current rules.
So hello first of all, i want to first greet all the fellow jebheads with my arrival in thia thread. Second of all what in the fuck is going on with this election? Is it over yet after soylord fucked em out of court or what ? Can someone please give me a small account on whats going.
I already made my peace with Trump going for the nuke.
Edit: As for the democrats, they get away with this steal, in 2024, even if Biden is a doddering old fool in a bathrobe unable to remember where is his head from his ass, the Republican will not win.
Well PA pissed off Alito, Thomas has a Joseph to sniff, the dems tried to #MeToo Kavanaugh and im sure Coney-Barrett would love to show off her notes again
I think a large part of it is that Socialism tends to have a "honeymoon" period where the country manages to be going alright, as it bleeds out the wealth from the system, and then ends when the government runs out of wealth to spend. National Socialist Germany was able to extend this period by exploiting other nations like Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and France once it ran out of its own resources to exploit. By the time that the cracks really started to show, roughly in 1944/45, it is easy for NatSocs to write this off as being due to the Allied bombing campaigns. In other words, Germany killing itself through bad strategic decisions before it could kill itself through bad economic decisions is the greatest thing to ever happen to the cause of National Socialism.
The problem is that Nazi economics only made sense if they took over Europe. And they had no chance of doing that. It's kind of telling that Hjalmar Schacht essentially quit because he told them their spending plans would cause hyperinflation. Now if you're a Nazi with some knowledge of economics you could say 'All the conquered lands will have goods to balance the new money'. However, that only works if you win. There's also a problem with conquest in the modern era. Back in the feudal days if you took over land you became the lord and all the peasants paid you what they paid the lord you replaced. In the modern era, it's just not like that. Factory workers might decide to go slow or sabotage stuff. If they run out of resources like oil or molybdenum even loyal workers will produce less. The Nazis run out of both so their armor started to run out fuel and spare parts.
TIK did an interesting video on Hitler's view of economics and it was really weird. Much weirder than Marxism to be honest.
You should always support Pinochetian Minarchist economics which is basically good old fashioned freedom and capitalism apart from an initial burst of extrajudicial murder. National Socialism is still socialism. In fact, it's a particularly nasty variant of it. Socialism will typically ruin the country it is tried in - it's like a more extreme version of the shitty economy you get from Social Democracy. National Socialism will metastasize into all the country's neighbors and ruin them too.
A lot of this relies on misconceptions like the Reich economy didn't work outside of war, which is patently untrue - unemployment vanished two years prior to rearmament ever actually beginning, and this wasn't just chalked up to the arms industry - it could be argued that the arms industry was vastly underpaid in comparison to the actual labor put into their work by German industrial workers but it was agreed by even the British at the time that German service sectors and agricultural sectors were vastly overpaid for their labor, and quality of life outside of the industrial sector skyrocketed in comparison to the German quality of life pre-1933.
"The German armament program did not really get going until after the war against the Soviets was underway. We started with 3,260 tanks. That's all we had, but the Soviets had 10,000. At that time our monthly production was 35 tanks. Imagine that! It wasn't until October 1944 that we reached the high point of our production of 1,000 tanks per month. So, our monthly production of tanks went from 35 in 1941 to 1,000 in late 1944. That's quite a difference, and it's proof that we were simply not militarily prepared for a world war." - Otto Remer.
Economists like Ludwig von Mises who were chief advisors to people like Engelbert Dollfuss along with Conservative stalwarts like Schacht utilized temporary measures that didn't work in long-term to begin with, their theories were short-term posturing for growth: in regards to Mises, he had allowed Austrian banks to lend at sixty times their capacity two years into the Wall Street crash, this led to the collapse of the Austrian banking system which pulled the rug under the Hungarian government; their currency, the Fenic, was rendered worthless in a year - the Reich attempted to revert this but you can't revert that without actually seizing and nationalizing Austrian industry, and by 1937, Hungary was considering an alliance with Germany, so some sort of economic solution was literally required.
Schacht used MEFO bills which were based in an imaginary company (MEFO) and there was no way MEFO bills would actually work after rearmament began, so yes, he'd been sacked - Gottfried Feder was far more responsible for Reich economics than Walther Funk himself ever was, so I ultimately discard the role of Walther Funk following the sacking of Schacht.
"The aims of the present regulation of production can be summarized in a few words. First, the securing of supplies of raw materials for industry. All measures serving this aim are included in the Four-Years-Plan the aim of which is to make Germany as independent as possible of imports by increasing domestic production.
Second, an increase in domestic agricultural production with the aim of making Germany, as far as possible, self-sufficient in the field of foodstuffs.
Germany has only a few raw materials and has always been faced with the necessity of importing the greater part of her raw material requirements. But as you realize, imports can only be paid for out of export proceeds or other credit items in the balance of payments such as shipping, insurance, or proceeds from capital investments abroad. As a result of the War, Germany is no longer a creditor but a debtor country. In other words, she was burdened with a tremendous indebtedness and had at her disposal no great income from investments abroad, while her other income from abroad is today less than it was before the War. Germany must therefore limit her imports to the extent of her exports, with the consequence that Germany's raw material and foodstuffs imports are dependent on the amount of goods which other countries are able and willing to take from her in payment."
The German government follows no definite theory in establishing the methods by which intervention in the field of production is to be accomplished. This is one of the most characteristic traits of National-Socialist economic policy. In combatting unemployment, the government did not follow one theory such as the theory of direct public works or the theory of the stimulation of private initiative, but followed both theories impartially according as to which seemed best at the time. The same is true of the regulation of production.
The various measures may be classified as: 1. indirect and 2. direct.
The State undertakes indirect measures when it intervenes not in production and capital investment themselves but in conditions which govern them.
There are four special groups of indirect measures:
1. Regulation of taxes, especially reduction of taxes.
For example, in order to revive automobile production, which was at an extremely low level, and thus to stimulate motorization in Germany, which had lagged far behind the level of motorization in other countries, as early as 1933 the Government abolished the tax on all new passenger cars, later extending this to all automobiles. This made automobiles much cheaper and increased the sales of the industry. In the last five years, these measures together with the economic upswing have brought about a great advance in automobile sales and a great improvement in German motorization. In 1932, only 19 out of every 1,000 people in Germany owned cars as compared with 41 in France and 37 in Great Britain; today, however, the figure for Germany is 35 in every 1,000, as compared with about 51 per thousand in France and Great Britain.
A further example of regulation of production by means of tax reductions was the exemption of short term capital goods from income tax. After 1933 the value of these goods could be deducted from taxable income of the individual and from the taxable profits of an enterprise. This stimulated the purchase of such goods and was a means of increasing the low activity of the capital goods industry. The elasticity of the National-Socialist economic policy can be seen in the fact that this measure was repealed as soon as the capital goods industry was fully employed.
2. The second means of indirect regulation of production is price policy. This can take place in two ways: by a reduction in costs and by an increase in, or guarantee of, sales prices. These methods have been chiefly used in the field of agriculture, where production reacts quickly to price changes. An example of this reduction may be seen in the prices for artificial fertilizer, farm machinery and agricultural implements. On the other hand, by a scaling of farm prices it has been possible to increase considerably the acreage given over to winter barley, the production of fiber plants and oil fruits, and the number of sheep.
3. Closely related to this price policy is tariff policy, the utilization of which is necessary where domestic goods compete with foreign products. This is particularly important in the case of agricultural products, the prices of which are considerably lower on the world market than in Germany. Special boards have been set up in order to compensate for these differences in prices, and are empowered to regulate imports.
4. The last method of indirect regulation of production is the prohibition of new private issues on the capital market. Since new issues are permitted only for special purposes all those branches of trade and industry which are shut off from the capital market are thus limited in their capital investment possibilities. They can only extend their plants, etc., to the degree that their own funds allow. Thus in 1933 a special board was set up under the control of the Reichsbank, to which application must be made before new issues are floated. Permission is only granted for private issues in the case of companies which serve the ends of the Four-Years-Plan, where, moreover, no other possibility of financing their work exists.
It should be noted that the form of rearmament that Germany used to spur economic growth from 1935-onward was no different than the American model used to spur growth out of the Great Depression - rearmament is essentially what saved the American economy, but the reality is if America hadn't actually successfully used the results of rearmament, they would've experienced the same hyperinflation that Germany experienced in 1945 - snapshotting German economics in 1945 as a point of criticism is considerably poor considering by 1945, most German industry had been bombed, sabotaged, or flatout lost - the German heartland started to experience massive fucking bombing campaigns by 1944, and the rest of Europe saw bombing campaigns as early as 1943; were one to snapshot German economics in, say, 1941, and the war were to end two years later, then you'd be hardpressed to say that a magical bubble of hyperinflation would've been seen considering the Reich would've had access to a long-list of resources - from oil in Bessarabia to the Caucasus, German arms industry would've still been fairly well-equipped, but deprioritized and would've been reverted to the status of 1933, where the service sectors and agricultural sectors saw high investment and subsidy in order to recover from armament.
As for practicality of winning the war, that's an entirely different debate which leads to a long-list of spergpoints that armchair historians on both sides have argued over since 1955; war with the Soviets was inevitable, whether or not Hitler himself began the war - allowing Stalin to proceed with full modernization instead of seizing the moment when the Soviets had just lost 200,000+ soldiers to the Finnish of all people in a grand display of their military incompetence would've assuredly likely led to a red Europe in larger ways than 1945 ever did.
The "Socialism" of National Socialism lay alongside military Keynesianism and vague aspects of Corporatism that were inspired by earlier examples of Syndicalist economics, it's extremely hard to apply an economic sense of purism in judgment to Reich economics, considering half of the NSDAP themselves said there was no single economic theory in nazi doctrine - Italy used the same economic model without rearmament, and saw the same results: the implication that 'rearmament' is a requirement of fascist economics implies that Italy successfully rearmed (or tried to), and they clearly didn't pay a bit of fucking priority to their military industry, as seen in how vastly fucking incompetent their military was come wartime, and how backwards much of their equipment was - their lack of access to raw materials wasn't the only reason, considering most Italian steel & iron was put to public works programs that extended themselves until 1945.
In regards to the books (I've read Tooze's books on the 'unsustainability' of the German economy):
pa has a lot of issues. some counties cures, while others didnt, not allowing observers, sometimes excluding gop only othertimes excluding all, defying orders to segregate ballots, allegedly throwing away envelopes instead of retaining them, mixing improper ballots with proper ones, etc etc.
if the two guys in trump's case won, it wouldnt mean much in terms of election trust. the whole ballot total is tainted and the fed court doesnt want to throw anything out. we're stuck with a fucked up pile of votes.
i cant think of a good solution to the poisoned ballots, having the envelopes for signature match doesn't do much if the ballots themselves are unidentifiable.
the only thing is to let the state legislature decide or have a special election under strict rules.
its the same for michigan where there are 0 registered voters but thousands of votes mixed together.
this is unprecedented, and scotus will have to rule precedence. if the counts stay, then future elections will be based on who can cheat the best.
Did anyone post that shit-colored fag Ali spazzing out because the “hillbillies” had ideas about how to protest? He has to be controlled opposition or something. This Sammy Davis Jr. looking motherfucker thinks he leads the 75 million Trump supporters now?
And Kamala will go on to win the next one. And not because of the bullshit behind "demographics are destiny" or woke white liberals or niggers. It's because they will rig the elections and will keep on doing it and frankly I don't blame them looking at the state of the GOP and how many cuckservatives want to believe that they can all go back to being boy scouts.
Did anyone post that shit-colored fag Ali spazzing out because the “hillbillies” had ideas about how to protest? He has to be controlled opposition or something. This Sammy Davis Jr. looking motherfucker thinks he leads the 75 million Trump supporters now? View attachment 1741950 View attachment 1741951
