Cecilie1200
Diamond Member
blaah de blah?? smokescreen? is that what you do when you have no response? i don't think the court would find that very compelling argument. i understand your frustration though. it must be very difficult for you to have to respond to someone who actually knows you're just words...without the slightest bit of knowledge behind them.
I've already told you. The law was and is that the highest court of every state is the final arbiter of their own election law. no one who knows anything is going to argue that. but feel free to research the subject.Dissenting opinions in Bush v. Gore
yes, it's the dissenting opinion in bush v gore, but it is the law at the time and it is now. if bush v gore were correct, the court wouldn't have written the only opinion in its history that it said was of no precedential value.
feel free to read the case citations contained in the dissent. those, i believe are what you are looking for. they are still good law and have never been overturned. and given that bush v gore isn't good law, you have to rely on those cases.
btw, it's ok that you don't know these things. i get paid to. you don't. what's not ok is your absolute certainty that everyone you disagree with is wrong while your UNINFORMED opinion is correct.
Note the part underneath where I identify your post for what it is (a smokescreen with a ton of meaningless blather) which contains my response. Duuhhh.
I will feel free to dismiss this entire post, since I did NOT ask you to cite USA frigging Today. I asked you to cite law and/or precedent. If your next post does not do any better at this request, I will FURTHER feel free to assume that you are admitting that I am correct. YOU may feel free to shove your "do more research" up your ass - right next to the spot you drag your opinions out of, one assumes - until such time as YOU can answer the fucking question.
By the way, it is NOT okay that you don't know these things, especially since you keep prattling to everyone that you get paid to. No one is buying your bullshit, Mensa Girl, except for those people on the board even less able to walk and chew gum at the same time than you are. It's long past time you pony up something real, instead of just "I must be right because I can claim [fill in the blank] job".
Strike one.
I'm wondering if you're intentionally lying of if you're a sociopath. i gave you links to the cases... not to USA today.
i don't make any untrue claims. it wouldn't be worth my time.
like i said... if you had a real response, you'd have come up with one.
epic fail on your part...
I feel kind of sorry for you. you must be feeling very embarrassed right about now.
Your answer is "It's true because I say so" and I have an epic fail? Yeah, right.
So little Miss "I'm a law expert because I can claim to be on the Internet" can't be bothered to cite the actual laws she claims pertain? Big surprise.
Strike two, Chuckles. Score stands at "Cecilie cited Florida election law and the US Constitution, 'Chief Justice' Jillian cited the great legal experts, USA Today". See if you can redeem some shred of dignity and actually cite a real law this time.