Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

catbyte

(34,333 posts)
Fri Nov 20, 2020, 08:59 PM Nov 2020

Trump campaign loses again in court -- this time to G. Gordon Liddy's son

November 20, 2020
By Sarah Toce

President Donald J. Trump’s campaign lost again in court Friday, this time in Maricopa County.

Judge Mahoney said, “I will be dismissing the complaint with prejudice. I have heard what I needed to hear today.”

Maricopa County lawyer Tom Liddy then defended the county’s election that resulted in President-elect Biden winning the state of Arizona. Liddy is former FBI agent George Gordon Battle Liddy’s son. George was involved in the Watergate scandal as the chief operative in the White House Plumbers unit during the Nixon Administration.




https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/trump-campaign-loses-again-in-court-this-time-to-g-gordon-liddys-son/
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump campaign loses again in court -- this time to G. Gordon Liddy's son (Original Post) catbyte Nov 2020 OP
This is the signal the GSA should take. Monday can't come soon enough. joshcryer Nov 2020 #1
It's a small world. madaboutharry Nov 2020 #2
When even the Liddys think you're stepping over the line... KatyMan Nov 2020 #3
So is this, like, 31 or 32 cases that have been tossed? Brother Buzz Nov 2020 #4
33 lost or tossed; 2 wins. n/t Ms. Toad Nov 2020 #7
Those two weak sauce wins, in my feeble mind, should be scored as ties Brother Buzz Nov 2020 #8
They aren't. Ms. Toad Nov 2020 #9
Occasionally... Enterstageleft Nov 2020 #5
G was in prison when the kids were growing up liberaltrucker Nov 2020 #10
Today's moment of zen... regnaD kciN Nov 2020 #6
Rt.. That's Interesting! TY catbyte Cha Nov 2020 #11
Judge Mahoney "Tossed it out with Prejudice"! Cha Nov 2020 #12

Ms. Toad

(33,992 posts)
9. They aren't.
Sat Nov 21, 2020, 12:38 AM
Nov 2020

While they don't change the outcome of the election, they both interpretat of election law that are binding in that jurisdiction - and may impact later cases differently than this one.

Both remove flexibiilty of the courts to interpret election law in order to achieve a just result. From that perspective, the first one is more disconcerting than the second - since it rejected implementing the logical consequences that flowed an earlier court decision as to this election.

As a concrete example of why this kind of decision is troubling - Obergefell v. Hodges recognized same gender marriage. One might think that a logical consequence of that decision is that it would be illegal to fire someone for marrying their same-gender partner. That would be an incorrect legal conclusion. (Until the Supreme Court decision this June which - for most employers - prohibits termination based on sexual orientation.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump campaign loses agai...