Who is being 'snookered' and by whom?

I read a post here where someone accused Biden of 'snookering' voters in a thread about Biden's recent conciliatory remarks and I must say, I was surprised to see that word used in that context.

First we have these facts.
$200,000,000.oo and climbing in 'donations' to a legal fund from which 75% can be syphoned to pay of Trump's campaign debt or an RNC slush fund. https://www.registerguard.com/story...dless-coup-through-election-fight/6544979002/

" 75% of donations goes to a new political action committee that Trump formed in mid-November, up to the PAC’s legal limit of $5,000. The other 25% goes to the Republican National Committee. Only if a donor gives more than $6,000 do any funds go to Trump’s formal ‘recount’ account.”

What did these people buy for their money? https://www.9and10news.com/2020/12/10/status-of-election-related-legal-challenges/ Over 52 legal challenges were filed in 9 states: Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan. Arizona, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada. They are filed in court presumably and superficially to find legal merit as adjudicated by one of those blokes or blokettes in the black garb. Now how many were ultimately legally successful?

I have found one. I see these phrases and words which I will tally.

Denied ... lllllllllllll
Rejected or turned down .. llll
Dismissed...llllllllllllll
Voluntarily withdrew or dropped...lllllll
Threw out... ll
Refused / declined to hear... llll
Should be counted [Trust me, this phrase is always a legal victory for Biden] ... ll
Here's hope! Upheld... l (oops the entire phrase is 'upheld the dismissal on 12-9')
More hope! We have a 'ruled ballots cannot be counted' (oops that was overturned)

And that order to allow Trump supporters close ballot access, that was overturned.

I found the real victory for Trump on 11-12 in Pennsylvania over the 3 days deadline !

 

That victory cost 200,000,000.oo, did not change a single state or a single elector vote.

 

Is there a difference between donating freely and snookering?

 

How were they snookered when it tells you right where you donate what the money will be used for?

Seriously, what more could Trump do?

He asked for donations and people gave it.

Can you show me a single lawsuit of someone claiming they were snookered?

 

Kinda like this guy?

Trump supporter who gave $2.5m to fight election fraud wants money back

Trump supporter who gave $2.5m to fight election fraud wants money back | US political financing | The Guardian

 

There was 2 legal wins I heard. Tim Pool talks about it here in this old video:

 

Thanks to Trump's tax cut every Republican became a billionaire. So it is only natural for them to show their gratitude by sending him some of their windfall.

 

I didnt send him any of my billions, actually i'm still looking for my billions, apparantly I misplaced most of it.

 

Wow, it's like we're playing some kind of weird volleyball game where you just made an amazing setup for the opposing team.

Pretty sure it was a recently hot topic on media and around here.

@ronv already linked it, but, hey, I kinda feel like piling on.

Google it!

https://www.google.com/search?clien...n+fraud+fund&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Here's a specific article.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...trump-group-over-failure-to-prove-voter-fraud

Some folks here at PF, perhaps, in addition to me, await your redemptive reply....

 

Snookering??

Fer chrissakes nobody's even PLAYED snooker for at LEAST 100 years. Where do you people even GET these sayings? Do you all sit around reading novels from like 1900 or what?

 

I think you'll find that many parts of the civilised world still play snooker.
Unfortunately, the American usage of the word bears no resemblance to the game.

Now look at some top quality snookers, you never know, it may help civilise you.

 

As long as it's not Pool

 

Sure, that was one guy who had a different arrangement with Trumps people due to his large donation.

It is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

 

Your lack of candor here is spectacular.

And how much did you donate?

 

I don't think Biden has the wherewithall to 'snooker' anyone. The DP on the other hand got 90%+ of the $10B+ that was donated to BLM. Don't even try to tell me that money was meant to go to the Party standing behind Joe 'if you don't vote for me, you aint black' Biden.

 

link please

 

Even if Trump loses every single lawsuit, I don't see the glass as being half full; I see it as being full. Here's why ...

Because what so many seem to have forgotten and don't appreciate is the fact that we are a country of laws, and we operate under the rule of law. As a part of that rule of law, we have the privilege of being able to have our grievances heard and judged according to the law.

Trump's objections to the fairness or legitimacy of the election results will be heard and decided in courts of law, not with an armed revolution, not with a military coup.

If this process serves to expose weaknesses in our election system, as Americans, we should put away our partisan tribalism and work together to strengthen and secure the system.

So I don't see any of this as harmful to us. Instead, we should be thankful to live in such a country. That's how I see it.

 

Pardon my rant here Mr. Seth, part of this festival of words coming up here is just so I can try and practice my grammar and ability to construct a decent sentence.

I have to disagree with your argument or assessment here. Trump plays with the law like a rabid Rottweiler with it being his personal chew toy, and he's been doing it for a very long time. The number of lawsuits he and his company have been involved in are unprecedented in the history of any other President of the United States. The sheer volume of these lawsuits, in excess of 3000, would typically be a red flag for any contractor wishing to do business with the Federal Government in general and the DoD in particular. There are almost certainly no officers in the US military that are getting promoted with a bunch of lawsuits on their record. And sadly enough as so many seem to have forgotten through their acceptance of Trump, Rs once upon a time could be counted upon to be disdainful of frivolous litigation.

In this particular thread, you seem to be asserting that these election challenges are legitimate simply because we have an independent judicial system and under ideal circumstances our society functions under the law with equal justice for all. But you do not mention or choose to point out that this is an ideal that is frequently unattained, and that one of the greatest factors to its lack of attainment is money. I am a bit curious whether or not you or other members here actually donated to any of these election challenge funds.

Trump's objections to the fairness and legitimacy of the elections have been dismissed by the courts, with many of the judges having been appointed by Trump or W. And yet you will find members here that are still complaining that the cases have merit and these judges are making illegitimate rulings as though they didn't even bother to read the filling, or that they are merely supporting a corrupt election system using software developed for Chavez.

What we have occurring here, in my opinion, is a McCarthy era style hit job that the Don is playing out to the dearly departed glee of his longtime legal advisor and mentor, the infamous Roy Cohn. And he's doing it in large part because he has the money to do it. And the courts have thrown out all of them, haven't they? Haven't they?

Not to mention that this behavior only contributes to assertions that he owes Putin and his oligarchs some gifts because of what many folks legitimately suspect has been their patronage of his many real estate money laundering facilities. The Divider in Chief, and this post of yours assert that it is partisan tribalism of the people causing the divide? People follow leaders, and this one has very seldom ever made any effort at being non-partisan. And here at the end of his term we have a massive Russian hack of the Federal Government in the midst of Trump doing his absolute best to rally 74 million citizens to consider Biden's Presidency to be illegitimate. And you don't see any harm in this? Really?

And then you write of the value of this process as it may expose weakness in our election system. The fact that the Don has been allowed into the Oval office has exposed one of the most fundamental weaknesses of our election system ever imaginable. A fatal flaw has been exposed when we have a Speaker of the House that has allowed illegal actions from the President to impede its power to conduct a full inquiry into whatever it wants to know about the President as part of its sole power of impeachment. The fact that our Department of Justice is in fact independent not by law, but by tradition. The apparent fact that, the Don was literally correct when he claimed that he could shoot someone on fifth avenue and get away with it.

I'm not sure where you fall into the camp of some folks around here that like to reference the Constitution. For those that do, "sole power" occurs twice and executive privilege occurs never.

Nebulous claims of fraud from the man that has yet to disclose his finances and his taxes. Why? If someone has something to hide or they have concerns that their identity or financial accounts could be hacked then perhaps they are simply unqualified to either run for or much less hold the office of the Presidency. There is a price to pay to hold the nuclear launch codes, isn't there?

***
In this country our elections are absolutely not typically decided in a court of law: as far as I know, W's win over Gore in 2000 was the only instance it occurred. I'd be grateful for someone to educate me otherwise.

We've never had a President take power through an armed revolution or a military coup, excepting of course the 11 traitorous states that chose their own President as part of their rebellion against their oath to the Constitution of the United States. If anything this sad piece of our history certainly proves that partisan tribalism isn't really as new or divisive as it has been in the past. Folks around here asserting about how bad our current times are have lost perspective when just comparing the events of the 1960s with those of the 2010s, much less other eras in the nation's past.

***
Speaking of things people may have forgotten, this is the President whose longtime personal attorney and "fixer" became a fall guy for the Don, aka Individual 1. Sad really. Sometimes in my life I admit that I've thought, man, it sure would've been great to have been born to some rich parents. I wonder how many of our Trump supporters here would like to have the Don for a Dad. It will certainly be interesting to see how things shake out between Don and Mel and Barron.

 

@Grey Matter I really wasn't commenting on the validity of Trump's lawsuits. I was making the point that we have the ability in this country to have our grievances heard in a court of law instead of resorting to violence - military coups and such. I think we take it for granted, and so if we think Trump's lawsuits have no merit, we focus on that. But while we focus on that, we forget why it is so important that we have this system of laws and judicial process. The alternative would be violence and chaos just like we see in other countries in the world. We can all be thankful that this is how disputes are settled in this country, rather than by who has the biggest army and the most guns. That was my point. I appreciate your feedback, however.

Seth

 

I don't donate to politics.

 

Sure ya don’t. You probably sent sweet daddy Don at least a nice gift basket from Harry and David.

 

He is welcome to donate to me, I need money more than he does.

 

If you really loved Jesus you wouldn’t need money.

 

Why?

 

One cannot have success in court if the case is never heard which dismissing on standing and laches accomplishes.