Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Good for Nick Sandmann
I think that the media’s treatment of Nick Sandmann and the Convington Catholic kids was one of the worst things of the last four years. Sandmann was right to sue for defamation, and I hope that he got millions in his settlements. I am also very glad that he shows more courage and maturity than a lot of people by speaking the truth and calling out craziness.
https://twitter.com/JerryDunleavy/status/1345157892337500171
I don’t know what happened to Lin Wood. He was an accomplished and respected attorney. I hope that any friends and family he has are checking on him and trying to get him help, because something is seriously wrong with the man.
Published in Elections
Who’s gonna do it?
No judge wants to hear it. The law is dead.
Well there were sixty chances for Team Trump to get this before a Judge. They didn’t.
No, it was not argued. If it was argued then a judge would have ruled on it. But having not argued it, Team Trump is far too late to bring it before Congress now.
Just reporting.
The actual number of lawsuits is irrelevant- what matters is that in NO case did the Trump legal team enter evidence of voter fraud. As for the Penn case-the US SC refused to hear the appeal- effectively upheld the Penn SC on the matter. If they have evidence I certainly wish they would enter it.
So sayeth the CCP on Ricochet.
Oh, like I care what Team Biden thinks about anything.
You NTs will reap what you sewed. I find it hard to believe that someone who voted for Trump cannot see the massive vote fraud.
You will reap what you sewed. I don ‘t believe that a Trump voter does not see the fraud. The courts have refused to look at the evidence. We will see what happens next.
The Vichy Republican speaks.
Look at the bright side, Michael. The next Republican presidential candidate will meet with the full approval of both the GOPe and the Swamp. Benjy Sasse, maybe. Or Jon Huntsman. Or Jeffie Flake. Someone whose suit becomes emptier when he puts it on.
MichaelKennedy- you might help your argument with some evidence-rather than continued ad hominems- “NT” “Vichy” etc. Until a testimony under the threat of perjury alluding to 45K fraudulent votes appropriately split among GA, NV, WI occurs then the case for Trump is pathetically weak. I await Sydney’s release of the Kracken-to date all she has released is crap. Mind you, I wish she had some evidence.
Time to turn down the heat, guys. Just because someone is unconvinced that the election was stolen from Trump does not make them a member of the Chinese Communist Party or a Nazi collaborator.
This is great. Reminds me of a comment someone made about… some dumb lefty, I don’t remember who… “when he takes viagra, he gets taller.”
I agree- moreover it isn’t that I am unconvinced but that, at this point, we have no evidence that would convince anyone who is impartial. To mount an electoral college challenge you need such evidence. I am a partisan FOR Trump as against Biden- but I am not the target audience. If we don’t have quality evidence we will look as venial as the democrats did during the whole Russiagate fiasco- they never had a shred of decent evidence ( b/c there wasn’t any).
PS-I really hope Durham puts some people in jail b/c of all the malfeasance in the FBI and CIA over the Steele document misuse & FISA court abuses. Clapper, Brennan, Comey, McCabe et al should get the perp walk. But I won’t hold my breath b/c in many cases you need a smoking gun to prove intent- but in fact the intent was clear.
Was the Sandman incident last year or two years ago? I’m losing sight of the years. I’ve been to the March fir Life inDC now running in five years straight. I was at the March when that happened but no where near the incident. I’m going down there again this year. I think it’s the 29th this year. Let me know if anyone else is going. Would be great to meet.
You neglected to read her evidence. It’s on you.
The tweets sound like Lin Wood has gone off the deep end. I am not following it too closely.
Regarding Nick Sandmann’s opinion, I care not a bit. He is a kid. His opinion and knowledge has no impact on me any more than David Hogg’s blatherings. Just because Sandmann was in the news and in the public eye doesn’t give him any wisdom, especially regarding his lawyer who has years of life and experience and accomplishments. Maybe Nick oughta sit at the kid’s table for a few more years and not chime in on adult conversations?
There is NO evidence-just claims in the press- and that is the WHOLE problem. You do not win a case with press releases- and so far Powell has not entered any evidence in her court fillings that show fraud- that is the point of the Andrew McCarthy articles I linked to earlier. He supported Trump in the election & is a very experienced attorney.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-fatally-flawed-trump-petition-to-the-supreme-court/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-stunning-passage-from-the-latest-court-rejection-of-team-trump/
here is more- sympathetic but critical of his legal team
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/why-trumps-election-fraud-lawsuits-flopped/
Trump’s legal team has made many allegations of procedural irregularities and problems with the voting process- but hasn’t shown that those irregularities resulted in a change in outcome-ie that therin was Biden’s margin.
I think the point is that even the kid who Wood helped out and for whom he got a huge settlement thinks that Wood has gone off the deep end. That’s something. One would expect Sandmann due to his years and the assistance of Wood would look favorably on him. Or say nothing at all. But even he knows something’s not right.
What was the average age of the soldiers who died on D-Day, the likes of whom, and millions more, to whom we owe our freedom? 19? 20? Something like that I believe.
I’m opposed, as any rational person should be, to the use of pre-pubescent children as props at political rallies of any sort, as they are ordered by their parents to march around carrying signs and shouting slogans, or as their schools endorse their singing songs of praise for their dear leader, whoever he may be.
However, Nick Sandmann has, from the start of his unsought eruption on to the public stage, shown some guts and some independence of thought (unlike St. Greta and St. David, who are single issue, closed-minded, one-trick authoritarian bullies whose appearances are carefully scripted, and who never veer off that script), and Nick is old enough to vote as well as die for his country (I’d be shocked, BTW, if he voted for Joe Biden). Perhaps, as he continues to mature in right-thinking directions, he should be encouraged, and not patronized?
Everyone under 24 or so should be handled very carefully when it comes to political punditry.
Not true. The judges have refused to hear it. The evidence has never been presented because the courts, corrupt or just cowardly, have not allowed it to be presented.
Corrupt or cowardly? How about both?
I assume you believe what you post. The evidence, including thousands of affidavits from eyewitnesses, were never ALLOWED to be presented in court. The decisions, contrary to Democrat and NT assertions, were all on standing or timeliness or some other process issue. There were, as far as I know, NO decisions on merits.
I don’t think that assertion has been made. There are some who seem almost eager to deny the fraud. Some of those were prior “Orange man bad” members.
That isn’t what happened- in WI the Trump campaign never claimed voter fraud in its court papers. The court didn’t deny their claims-they never made them- that is what the McCarthy article is about.
Crimenutely. If the corollary to that is that everyone over age 24 has a free ride when it comes to political punditry, no thank you. In my book, anyone who ascribes to “political punditry” should be viewed with deep suspicion, no matter his age.
I’m not sure if anyone here is ascribing the role of “political pundit” to young Mr. Sandman. I’m certainly not. I’m merely observing that that he seems to have some independence of thought and that I think he’s come down on the right side of this sorry issue from a human standpoint. That’s perhaps even more remarkable given that Lin Wood is his attorney in the media bias cases.
The political/electoral issue is completely separate for me, which is why I think it’s unfortunate that what are clearly unhinged Tweets about firing squads, political executions, implied judicial assassinations, Jeffrey Epstein being alive, suggestions that Republicans boycott the Georgia senatorial elections, and the myriad other idiocies of Lin Wood’s rantings, have so muddied the waters and diminished even more the capacity to have a rational conversation about it. Other attorneys for the President have distanced themselves from Wood on this, as well they should.
I shouldn’t have said “everyone”.
I think it’s usually a bad idea when any type of authority makes a big deal out of a young pundit.
I got that from Hugh Hewitt.