In critical battlegrounds, Maga allies mounting lawsuits to ‘lay the groundwork’ to challenge election if he loses

In critical battlegrounds, Maga allies mounting lawsuits to ‘lay the groundwork’ to challenge election if he loses

Key rightwing legal groups with ties to Donald Trump and his allies have banked millions of dollars from conservative foundations and filed multiple lawsuits challenging voting rules in swing states that are already sowing distrust of election processes and pushing dangerous conspiracy theories, election watchdogs warn.

They also warn that the groups appear to be laying the groundwork for a concerted challenge to the result of November’s presidential election if Trump is defeated by Kamala Harris.

America First Legal and the Public Interest Legal Foundation together reaped more than $30m dollars from the Wisconsin based Bradley Impact Fund and its parent, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, from 2017 through 2022, according to a financial analysis from the Center for Media and Democracy.

Lawsuits filed by the groups, which overlap with some Republican party litigation, focus in part on conspiratorial charges of non-citizen voting, which is exceedingly rare, and bloated voter rolls, and pre-sage more lawsuits by Trump if his presidential run fails, in an echo of his 2020 election-denialist claims, say watchdogs.

  • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
    11·
    26 days ago

    If some MAGA idiots want to try and stir shit up. Let them. All they’ll be doing is providing cover for the MAGA movement and leadership to be dealt with militarily. The answer to “OMG, what if MAGA tries to revolt after losing again??!” is simple. What do we do if any group takes up arms against the nation? We shoot them. We shoot them and we kill them. That is how you handle rebels and traitors. You shoot them, and you put them in the ground.

    Some idiots want to try an actual armed rebellion against the federal government? Go ahead. See how well that works out for you.

      • Yeller_king@reddthat.com
        8·
        26 days ago

        On 1/6 I kept thinking that there was finally a good reason for the police to open fire on people and they didn’t fucking do it. I guess they weren’t innocent or black enough.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      2·
      26 days ago

      Yeah so you realize the same discourse will be used by the other side that sees you as the traitor, right?

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          13·
          26 days ago

          My point is that saying they should get shot also gives them the right to say the same thing if you go and protest a Trump victory.

          • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
            51·
            26 days ago

            I only have so much tolerance for that kind of sophistic moral relativism.

            A madman might think it’s perfectly fine to kill and eat people because God told him it was what he wanted him to do, but I’m not going to give it any credence.

            There is an old saying that from time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered by the blood of tyranny. Times arise that democracy needs to be protected with lethal force. I am not talking about people protesting a Trump loss. I am talking about people trying to start an armed uprising to overturn the fair and legitimate results of a free and fair democratic election. I don’t care how mislead someone is. I don’t care if they honestly believe that they were cheated. If the election is free and fair, the vast majority of the populace and the armed forces of the country will be on the side of justice.

            I don’t really know what you expect here. Conspiracy theorists can be tolerated, as long as they don’t become dangerous. But when you cross the line into actually using violence to further your conspiratorial beliefs, well I’m sorry. You may honestly believe what you’re doing is right. But just like the madman killing and eating people, I’m still going to support whatever level of force is necessary to stop you. Your misguided beliefs do not mean the rest of us must simply sit back and let you run amok or tear down our democracy.

            I’m sorry, but moral relativism only gets you so far. My side is right because I AM willing to accept the results of a free and fair election. If Trump wins, I won’t be out there with a rifle trying to storm the capital shouting the vote was rigged by millions of illegal immigrants. We are not the same, and I fundamentally reject any bullshit sophistry that tries to put us on the same moral level.

            If a bunch of election deniers want to try and start an armed rebellion, then they should and will be met with lethal force. That what you do with rebels. There isn’t a rebel group in history that hasn’t had their own set of convoluted beliefs that put themselves on the side of the angels. When you abandon democracy, abandon truth, let your conspiracies run wild, and decide that your people should rule, democracy be damned? I’m sorry. But you have now made yourself an enemy of the Republic, and you will be dealt with accordingly. This is why the military swears an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign AND domestic.

            If another group tries to storm the capital building, I hope there are machine gun nests out front that tear them all to ribbons. I’m sorry, but I do not fuck around when it comes to defending my nation’s democracy. Democracy is worth dying for. Democracy is worth killing for. And if you decide that might makes right, and that you are going to try to overturn a fair election by force? Regardless of why you are doing it, your life is now forfeit.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              12·
              26 days ago

              My side is right because I AM willing to accept the results of a free and fair election.

              And in their mind their side is right because they’re unwilling to accept an unfair election. See how that goes?