Jump to content

the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

Just now, wildcat09 said:

Alito is an actual dipshit. Clarence is smarter than most give him credit for, he just doesn’t really give a shit what the Constitution says and always argues that the real law is whatever he thinks it should be.

That’s giving him a lot of credit

He does what Ginny tells him to 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

In a way, a bigger opinion, even if more scathing, would give that dogshit more dignity than it deserved.

Excellent point. I’m satisfied with this result. Even Alito and Thomas’s concurring statement. It’s just a difference of opinion on a legal semantic. Given their past opinions they probably had to say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mdmost said:

Ha. Fox News is now pinning all their hopes on investigating Hunter Biden. 

....and the China-Democrat spy connection with Swalwell and Pelosi.   If you watch Fox you wouldn't even know we are in the middle of a pandemic.  Just that Hunter and all of the Dems are trying to take our country and steal our Democracy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Alito is an actual dipshit. Clarence is smarter than most give him credit for, he just doesn’t really give a shit what the Constitution says and always argues that the real law is whatever he thinks it should be.

I have been legitimately surprised that Alito and Thomas have been bigger hacks than anyone Trump has appointed.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man Tigerdroppings peeps are really hurting.

 

re: United States Supreme Court rejects the Texas led casePosted on 12/11/20 at 5:56 pm to beaver
My regret is bringing children into this world. America is over and I’m fine with that. As a Christian it is a reminder that my hope is not in this world but the next.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Trumpers...y'all have the weekend to hatch your next plan.  EC voters are literally heading to their state capitols as we speak to cast their ballots on Monday.  You'll then have another window, between 12/14-12/23 when the votes are due in the D.C. Capitol.  So that's a sizeable timeframe to scheme up something good.  I'm sure you'll think of something, like blocking the delivery of the EC ballots because the truck was needed for vaccine deliveries in some sort of bizarro Newman/Kramer bottle deposit scam.  

And then your last ditch effort is to usurp the Congressional approval of the EV votes on or before 6 January.  That's when the real hijinks should ensue.  Rudy should be back from the dead by then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, G650 said:

I have been legitimately surprised that Alito and Thomas have been bigger hacks than anyone Trump has appointed.

I’m not. They are right now by far the two worst and will remain so unless Amy gets going. We shall see with her.

Gorsuch and donkey dong Doug, while not great, will still always be somewhat bette than those 2 fools.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The thing is, their dissenting opinion -- setting aside ALL consideration of the subject matter, politics, merits, etc. -- is fucking legally gotdamn stupid and wrong.

The court has jurisdiction to hear suits between states.  We all get that.

BUT, if the suit is NOT actually between States -- that is, the capacity in which it is brought is actually on behalf of individual citizens of a State, and the State of Texas (as a distinct entity --- a State) has no standing to bring the claim that it seeks to file......then it is not a suit between the states.  It is in reality a suit of "A suit on behalf of the citizens of Texas, filed by the AG of Texas, against the State of Pennsylvania."  And SCOTUS does not have original jurisdiction for that case. 

Right, but 7 of them agreed with this, correct?  At least the two morons did what we expected.  22% moron demographic ain't bad.  Well, on the highest court in the land it's bad, but at Jiffy Lube or Best Buy it ain't so bad.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cousin Strawberry said:

Man Tigerdroppings peeps are really hurting.

 

re: United States Supreme Court rejects the Texas led casePosted on 12/11/20 at 5:56 pm to beaver
My regret is bringing children into this world. America is over and I’m fine with that. As a Christian it is a reminder that my hope is not in this world but the next.

No one stopping them from going to the next world.  

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cousin Strawberry said:

Man Tigerdroppings peeps are really hurting.

 

re: United States Supreme Court rejects the Texas led casePosted on 12/11/20 at 5:56 pm to beaver
My regret is bringing children into this world. America is over and I’m fine with that. As a Christian it is a reminder that my hope is not in this world but the next.

 

i mean, i felt that way in 2016, but not really. good lord, the dramatics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The thing is, their dissenting opinion -- setting aside ALL consideration of the subject matter, politics, merits, etc. -- is fucking legally gotdamn stupid and wrong.

The court has jurisdiction to hear suits between states.  We all get that.

BUT, if the suit is NOT actually between States -- that is, the capacity in which it is brought is actually on behalf of individual citizens of a State, and the State of Texas (as a distinct entity --- a State) has no standing to bring the claim that it seeks to file......then it is not a suit between the states.  It is in reality a suit of "A suit on behalf of the citizens of Texas, filed by the AG of Texas, against the State of Pennsylvania."  And SCOTUS does not have original jurisdiction for that case.  Cases that facially lack jurisdiction can and should be dismissed by the court.  And if leave is required to even file the case, and the court determines that the case isn't of the nature that would satisfy the jurisdictional requirements for leave to be granted -- then just deny leave, period.  Which is what 7 of them got right.

Alito thinks he's smarter than he is. He's not.  And Clarence....well, that dumbass just finds a different dog to follow around, playing second fiddle to moronity.  He did much better when he had Scalia to follow -- at least Scalia was super smart.

I’m not sure about your detective work here Lou.

The only difference they had was whether or not to grant leave to file, which they argued was not discretionary. They would have denied relief after granting leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...