Non-Commissioned Officer in the National Guard, only reached Major

That sentence disqualifies you from ever commenting about anything military.

#s 19 & 20

That's some incoherent babble. Again, the question is "proof of citizenship." The suggested proof is a birth certificate. Mine does not do that. So now what?

More babble? More BS?

Are you suggesting ...

No, I'm asking a question based on the provided data. Do you have an answer or just more hyperbolic BS?

I'm betting more hyperbolic BS but we'll see.

...without showing proof of citIzenship[sic]...

I'm curious, how does this "proof of citizenship work?" Birth certificate? The last certified copy of mine that I saw had a bunch of typed information. It had nothing that would evidentially tie me (this body, this person) to that piece of paper. Thus, check box or birth certificate what's the difference?

So how does this work, hyperbolic's?

Why would they unilaterally disarm?

Dumbass exposed himself and will be booted next election.

Suspect in Democratic office shooting had over 200 guns

So?

... leading law enforcement to believe ...

They are Nostradamus?

... your opinion about her being removed ...

While I disagree with the merit of some of her decisions (as affirmed by the 11th Circuit), I'm not on the removal bandwagon, yet.

She [Judge Cannon] will be lucky to avoid prison when he loses.

Just how bad does that exhibition of stupid taste?

Would have been nice if he had been identified. He's former Tarrant County Judge Glenn Whitley (2007-2022). That's an executive position not a judicial one.

#23

So, you're a pendant obsessing about the improbable because of the unknowable to achieve nothing.

Party on, dude.

#17

#8

I don't know what to say. I assume folks comprehend a lawsuit is filed and is adjudicated in the normal coarse of business. That normal case is truncated with most post election legal challenges because of certification deadlines. Here are canvassing, certification, etc. deadlines for all the states and territories. (I did the search, I ain't readin' 'em fer ya.)

But the area where I diverge seems to be the legal proceedings to get to the end results above.

What about the "legal prceedings?"

All that's needed is a VP who'll try to throw it to the HoR ...

How long will it take? Use 2020 as a template. Most if, not all of the legal challenges, were resolved well before any certification deadlines. I've read that since then some states have put in place procedures to further expedite such challenges. That's the best answer I can give considering "how long" depends on variable across 50 states that I'm not going to look up.

What happens as the process plays out? Again, use 2020 as a template. The loonies will be loony but that will, again, have no effect on how the legal process plays out.

The process was not "too late" last time around. There's no reason to think it will be this time, unless you are a media company trying to sell advertising.

For example, what would've happened if Pence sent it back to the states, and SCOTUS decided "not to get involved"...?

You should try RTFA.

Tamping down more hand wringing about the Buffoon losing the election.

As Election Day draws near, anxieties are running high among Democrats about how partisan actors backing Donald Trump might seek to steal the 2024 election. Trump himself has commented that "the only way we're gonna lose" is "if they cheat," raising the specter of another attempt to upend the election results like the country saw in 2020. The danger is real, but much of the speculation about mechanisms Trump or his allies might use to overturn election results risks unnecessarily raising the anxiety level of voters. To be sure, partisan actors might well try various ploys to manipulate the outcome, particularly if the election hinges on one or two states. But there are significant legal, institutional, and political guardrails already in place to thwart these partisan efforts.

A recent essay Neal Katyal authored in the New York Times is a good illustration of these anxieties. Katyal raised several nightmare scenarios for "a potential election crisis" under which, in his view, corrupt partisan actors could seek to deprive Vice President Kamala Harris of a lawful victory, if in fact she wins the election. But in each of the scenarios Katyal raises, the guardrails that are already in place should temper these concerns.

#10

Pildes rains on Katyal's parade.

A recent essay Neal Katyal authored in the New York Times is a good illustration of these anxieties. Katyal raised several nightmare scenarios for "a potential election crisis" under which, in his view, corrupt partisan actors could seek to deprive Vice President Kamala Harris of a lawful victory, if in fact she wins the election. But in each of the scenarios Katyal raises, the guardrails that are already in place should temper these concerns.

If I find that article, I'll post it as a thread here. But I wanted to get back to you on your question.

Thanks, A*****e Hans.

I see HTML Hans is back. What an irritation.

That said, I'm genuinely curious about your up 3% can't get 270 assertion. You usually source such. Maybe I missed it in the wall of HTML. Help me out.

"Unless the drones are an imminent threat, by law they cannot by shot down near military bases."
That makes (a)bsolutely no sense. (emphasis mine)

It does with a minimum understanding of defensive "use of force" law.

I didn't see that in the article.

You won't see that information. Texas voter registration is open, no party affiliation is requested or required.