OK, #Squidigation fans, I think we need to talk about the new Wisconsin suit Donald Trump filed - personally - in Federal Court last night. The suit is (as usual) meritless. But it's meritless in new and disturbing ways. This thread will be

Not, I hope, Seth Abramson long. But will see.

I apologize in advance to my wife, who would very much prefer I be billing time (today's a light day, though) and to my assistant, to whom I owe some administrative stuff this will likely keep me from 😃
First, some background. Trump's suit essentially tries to Federalize the Wisconsin Supreme Court complaint his campaign filed, which we discussed here. https://t.co/a11AKAR92A
If you haven't already, go read that thread. I'm not going to be re-doing the same analysis, and I'm not going to be cross-linking to that discussion as we go. (Sorry, I like you guys, and I see this as public service, but there are limits)
Also, @5DollarFeminist has a good stand-alone thread analyzing the new Federal complaint - it's worth reading as well, though some of the analysis will overlap. https://t.co/W6J0Qd9MRq
Last bit of preliminaries - we'll also be talking about the DNC's motion to intervene in that Wisconsin Supreme Court action, which you can find here.

https://t.co/2uHpWCtHXe
OK. Let's get to it.

First of all, note the plaintiff in the new Federal suit, and compare it to the plaintiffS in the Wisconsin suit
This is, to say the least, unusual. Working from memory, I assumed that Trump had not personally been a plaintiff in the Wisconsin suit and that he (rather than the campaign) was the Plaintiff in the federal suit to try to avoid an argument that he couldn't file 2 cases on the
same basic issue. But Trump was a plaintiff in Wisconsin, too. So that can't be it. And if so, why aren't the Campaign - and Pence - named plaintiffs here, too?
There have been reports that Pence wants out of this whole debacle. That may be particularly true for this case, which - at face value & as we'll talk about - would call into question every federal election in Wisconsin for years, including Ron Johnson's

https://t.co/8OGzc3wzWm
I'm not sure how the campaign is structured, but I would bet that there was strong pushback to this suit by Pence and that Pence basically said "you do what you want but don't put my name anywhere near this"
OK. Substance. The first clue we get as to the claims is in the "Jurisdiction" section, where you tell the Federal Court, which can only hear certain types of cases, why your case is one that it can consider.
Section 1983 is the civil rights act - he's alleging that the "violations" the complaint will identify infringed on Wisconites' right to vote.

Article 1, §4 is the Elections Clause: State legislatures get to set the "time, place, and manner" for Congressional elections
Article 2, § 1, Clause 4 is the Electors Clause: For *Presidential* elections, State legislatures get to set the "Manner" of choosing electors. (Congress gets to set the "Time").
The 14th Amendment will be a due process claim. Not sure how the 1st plays in - probably a right of association claim.
Next the complaint transitions to what it says is a summary of the wrongful acts in Wisconsin. "Ultra vires", btw, is latin for "beyond your authority" - essentially, that the person in question had no legal power to do what they did
Here's the complaint's general summary of the issues they allege:

1) Changing absentee/mail in ballot rules
2) Using drop-boxes
3) Counting ballots without poll watchers able to see
4) Messing with the certifications on mail-in ballots
5) "Permitting ballot tampering"
The complaint asks for an expedited schedule sufficient to let Trump get up to SCOTUS by 12/11. This is insane. He's asking for a schedule built to accommodate 3 levels of appeal in 10 days - after waiting A MONTH after the election to file the case
Page 9 of the complaint - paragraphs 37-41 basically set out the argument that courts cannot constrain state legislatures' exercise of its Constitutional right to set the "manner" of appointing electors.

But it goes further:
That last paragraph is critical to their claim: they will be arguing that *interpreting* state statutes governing presidential elections is a violation of the Elections and Electors clauses. That is very very wrong.
BTW, a side note: Donald J. Trump is not - unless I missed something that would have been very obvious - a candidate for the US House of Representatives or US Senate.

Nope, he was not
There are going to be standing issues with all his claims. But there isn't even the ghost of a shadow of the as-yet-unborn grandchild of a chance that Trump has standing to allege a violation of the *Elections* clause governing election of Senators and Representatives.
Any reference to claims under the Elections clause in this complaint is completely and utterly frivolous.
The next several pages of the Complaint (which is doubling as the President's brief in support of his motion for injunctive relief) are charitably described as A Trumpy Salute to Federalism, in support of the "Leave it to the Legislatures" argument
I'm not kidding.
Next, Trump pauses to explain to the Court that yeah, the Wisconsin state legislature probably knows about all the terrible stuff he's about to complain about, but it should let him bring these claims on its behalf anyway
This is basically an argument that the court should find he has prudential standing to raise these claims. If you remember from old threads, "prudential standing" basically means "even if you got harmed by person A's violation of person B's rights, we're not going to let you sue"
"Because those are person *B's* rights, not yours. If person B wants to sue, fine. And you can tag along. But you, on your own, without person B? No."
Here, Trump is arguing the Court should let *him* sue for the alleged violation of the Legislature's rights, even though the Wisconsin Legislature isn't (and, as we'll see, hasn't for years)
OK, minor mental health break to keep me from saying Iä! Iä! Myopsida fhtagn! (as someone suggested I might). Back to it
Finally, at paragraph 73, the complaint starts to set out what it says the problems were. First, on photo ID - paragraphs 73-82 go into the background: Wisconsin really wants voters to give ID
And now, finally, we get to the issue they want to raise: the "indefinitely confined" issue from the Wisconsin case.
I know I said I wasn't going to cross-link, but I'm realizing now that this will be hard to follow if I don't. So, if you need a refresher on what they alleged on this issue in the Wisconsin case (and why it's wrong), start here https://t.co/GDKg5SR66h
Just realized I linked y'all to the DNC's motion to intervene, not their actual brief, in the Wisconsin case. Here's that brief, which we're about to quote.

https://t.co/x7E1trrHrS
The DNC's brief points out what my thread did: that the Wisconsin Election Commission issued - and the Wisconsin Supreme Court expressly approved - guidance on the meaning of "indefinitely confined" that torpedos Trump's case
What is Trump to do? Obviously, he's about to lose in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which already decided that issue. So he runs to Federal Court, and argues that the WEC and Wisconsin Supreme Court violated the constitution by putting out (and approving) this guidance
Here's their argument that the guidance doesn't comply with the Election Code
There are SEVERAL basic, fundamental problems with all of this.

First, Trump is *asking the Court to interpret the Wisconsin Election Code* in order to reach a conclusion that *nobody* can interpret the Wisconsin Election Code without violating the Constitution
Second, even if you get around that Mobius Strip of an argument, Trump is asking a Federal court to tell a State Supreme Court that the State Supreme Court is *wrong* in its interpretation of a STATE statute.
This ... is not a thing Federal courts can do.

No, I mean it's really really not. Not even SCOTUS.
Remember all that Federalism stuff Donny was waxing poetic about a few pages ago? This is part of it. State Supreme Courts are the ultimate arbiters of what State law *means*, in the same way that federal courts decide what federal law means
The Elections/Electors clause cases about things being exclusively committed to legislatures may mean that state constitutions can't constrain legislatures' choice of the "manner" of choosing electors (for example, if the state constitution said "every citizen can vote for prez"
And the state legislature decided to pass a law saying "the Legislature will directly appoint Presidential electors," the Supreme Court might find that law could not be defeated by the provision of the state constitution requiring a vote)
But what Trump is challenging here is NOT the State Supreme Court, or an executive branch official, saying "I know the Legislature wanted X, but we think NotX is better, let's do NotX"
This is the state supreme court exercising its core function of saying what the law passed by the Legislature *means*

Federal courts are prohibited from second-guessing that
Oh, and it gets better.

Because the Wisconsin Elections Commission? That's not an agency of Wisconsin's executive branch.

It was established *by statute* specifically to manage and administer *and interpret* Wisconsin elections and election law
So the WEC and its guidance, and interpretation of the Wisconsin Election Law, is *expressly* part of the "manner" in which the Wisconsin Legislature determined that Wisconsin would select presidential electors
And btw? Even if federal courts could look at this issue at all (again, they can't), the Legislature delegated interpretation and implementation of the Election Code to the Election Commission. That has implications under the Chevron Doctrine
Chevron was a 1984 Supreme Court case that basically found that where an agency is charged with enforcing a statute, courts MUST defer to the agency's reasonable interpretation of that statute.
Even if it thinks a different interpretation would be reasonable or better, the court must go by the agency's interpretation unless that interpretation is, to use a technical term, absolutely crazypants

More from Akiva Cohen

So, quick rundown of the latest #Squidigation decision: It's very thorough; 36 pages of Judge Parker explaining that Powell and her merry band of fuckups lose for every conceivable reason


First: 11th Amendment Immunity. Basically, states (and their officials) have sovereign immunity; you can't sue them in Federal Court except to the extent that they agree to be sued there. Quick thumbnail of the doctrine here


There are only 3 exceptions to this: 1) Congress says "you can sue your state for this"; 2) the state agrees to be sued; 3) Younger, a case that said "you can sue your state if you are just seeking an order saying 'stop violating my rights'"

In other words, if the state passes a law that says "no talking politics in public" you can sue for an order saying "that's unconstitutional and can't be enforced" but not for damages from having your 1A rights violated in the past

I'm sure you can see where this is going: Exceptions 1 and 2 don't apply; Congress didn't say "no sovereign immunity" when it passed 42 USC 1983 (the civil rights statute the plaintiffs sued under) and Michigan hasn't waived it. That leave Younger as the only remaining option

More from Trump

To those who want to actually help Claudia Conway after her mom (Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s former aide) posted her underage daughter’s nudes to Fleets, fill out a report on the NCMEC CyberTipline.
CPS refused to help her.
#HelpClaudia


Kellyanne Conway has a well-documented history of verbally abusing, gaslighting, and threatening her daughter. It gets worse when highly public things go viral (such as exposing the truth about Trump and Conway catching COVID-19 last October). Kellyanne coerces false statements.

Insider did a thorough chronological background of the history of exposing her parents abuse and control of her here:
https://t.co/ncjaEyLOSC

We all know that “statement” last year was coerced. She talks constantly about being abused by them.


Personally? I suspect Kellyanne is a narcissist. From my own experience being sexually and emotionally abused by a narcissist, they are obsessed with controlling the narrative (coerced typed statement), discrediting their victim (posting her nudes) & gaslighting

If you haven’t experienced gaslighting or aren’t familiar with it, it’s when someone causing you harm (physical, emotional, sexual, financial, etc) twists the facts and asserts that reality is just you being delusional and you don’t actually understand what happened.
It’s not clear how Dr. Sean Conley has determined Trump will no longer need to isolate only 10 days after symptom onset.

Looks like the CDC Guidelines say Trump should be in the category that needs to isolate for 20 days after symptom onset.👇

Plus ...



2. Fauci on Thursday used a (test-based) approach, in which case, per Fauci:

Trump needs to isolate for 10 days after symptoms RESOLVE (not symptoms onset) and then two negative tests.

Note: based on his coughing on Hannity last night, Trump’s symptoms haven’t resolved yet.


3. Here’s a longer quote from Fauci (via @MarionRenault):

https://t.co/oRdrtxQe80


4. Also noteworthy: on Hannity last night, Trump wouldn’t say he’s tested negative.👇

Thus failing one of the conditions required by Fauci for Trump to be considered no longer contagious.


5/5. This resource on coronavirus (UpToDate) has been specially made available to the public. It describes the test-based and non-test-based approaches.
@Nick_Carmody @NBCNews @BandyXLee1 @Narcopath_UK @narceducator The same tactics used with Trump were used with Hitler by the Evangelicals to set up someone who exhibits qualities as an AntiChrist into a role of a Saint but this time targetting Muslims as Killers of Americans & still using gay people as abomination of God to con churches...1/

@NBCNews @BandyXLee1 @Narcopath_UK @narceducator This was by design and process that developed over 60 years of psychological influencing through a collaboration of the entertainment world, religious broadcasts, oil/gas loyalists who bastardized the US Constitution, and #KochNetwork #DarkMoney orgs connected to DeVos...2/

@NBCNews @BandyXLee1 @Narcopath_UK @narceducator Judeo-Christian America never existed. 1A was designed to removed Roman Catholic Church of England hold over the newly formed US Government. It demands zero influence of religion over law or government decisions. The Virginia Baptist insisted on it w/ Thomas Jefferson...2/

@NBCNews @BandyXLee1 @Narcopath_UK @narceducator Judeo-Christian is coined from Nitzche's book "The AntiChrist" that means Jews converting to Christianity. It is used in the context we see today to tie in a Jewish Jesus into the Torah so that the strict rules of the Torah are elevated to a Christian philosophy. A paradox...4/

@NBCNews @BandyXLee1 @Narcopath_UK @narceducator It is a paradox because Jesus was a rebel Jew. He defied the teachings of the Torah which pissed off the Pharisees - Jewish religious leaders. He elevated poor & people society condemned to same level as leaders. He is nothing like what we see today as American Christianity...5/

You May Also Like

Trading view scanner process -

1 - open trading view in your browser and select stock scanner in left corner down side .

2 - touch the percentage% gain change ( and u can see higest gainer of today)


3. Then, start with 6% gainer to 20% gainer and look charts of everyone in daily Timeframe . (For fno selection u can choose 1% to 4% )

4. Then manually select the stocks which are going to give all time high BO or 52 high BO or already given.

5. U can also select those stocks which are going to give range breakout or already given range BO

6 . If in 15 min chart📊 any stock sustaing near BO zone or after BO then select it on your watchlist

7 . Now next day if any stock show momentum u can take trade in it with RM

This looks very easy & simple but,

U will amazed to see it's result if you follow proper risk management.

I did 4x my capital by trading in only momentum stocks.

I will keep sharing such learning thread 🧵 for you 🙏💞🙏

Keep learning / keep sharing 🙏
@AdityaTodmal
॥ॐ॥
अस्य श्री गायत्री ध्यान श्लोक:
(gAyatri dhyAna shlOka)
• This shloka to meditate personified form of वेदमाता गायत्री was given by Bhagwaan Brahma to Sage yAgnavalkya (याज्ञवल्क्य).

• 14th shloka of गायत्री कवचम् which is taken from वशिष्ठ संहिता, goes as follows..


• मुक्ता-विद्रुम-हेम-नील धवलच्छायैर्मुखस्त्रीक्षणै:।
muktA vidruma hEma nIla dhavalachhAyaiH mukhaistrlkShaNaiH.

• युक्तामिन्दुकला-निबद्धमुकुटां तत्वार्थवर्णात्मिकाम्॥
yuktAmindukalA nibaddha makutAm tatvArtha varNAtmikam.

• गायत्रीं वरदाभयाङ्कुश कशां शुभ्रं कपालं गदाम्।
gAyatrIm vardAbhayANkusha kashAm shubhram kapAlam gadAm.

• शंखं चक्रमथारविन्दयुगलं हस्तैर्वहन्ती भजै॥
shankham chakramathArvinda yugalam hastairvahantIm bhajE.

This shloka describes the form of वेदमाता गायत्री.

• It says, "She has five faces which shine with the colours of a Pearl 'मुक्ता', Coral 'विद्रुम', Gold 'हेम्', Sapphire 'नील्', & a Diamond 'धवलम्'.

• These five faces are symbolic of the five primordial elements called पञ्चमहाभूत:' which makes up the entire existence.

• These are the elements of SPACE, FIRE, WIND, EARTH & WATER.

• All these five faces shine with three eyes 'त्रिक्षणै:'.