The Supremes say "Stop In the Name of Law"
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected efforts by President Donald Trump and his allies to get the court to quickly consider challenges to President-elect Joe Biden’s victory in the November election, effectively shutting the door on the president’s last-ditch legal strategy to overturn his defeat.
The court released an order in the morning denying expedited consideration to suits filed by Trump’s campaign challenging election procedures in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
It similarly denied a request from the conservative conspiracy theorist L. Lin Wood to expedite his challenge to the election in Georgia, as well as other suits filed by Trump allies.
As far as they're concerned, it's over.
| by Anonymous | reply 8 | 01/11/2021 |
This is the best part:
There were no noted dissents from any of the court’s nine justices.
| by Anonymous | reply 1 | 01/11/2021 |
Not even Amy Covid Barnum?
After all I did for that bitch!
| by Anonymous | reply 2 | 01/11/2021 |
These little cases are meant to give the court credibility, a smokescreen for when they make the only ruling that matters. The big lie. That, because of social unrest and the previously declared National Emergency, Trump had legal authority to invoke Article 2 or War Powers or TJMax powers or whatever else the fuck he wants to do. GOPigs will say, "Dems can't claim the court is impartial, they ruled against him 5 times." Their plan is going swimmingly. The most important part of this plan is widespread violence. Or, maybe he'll invite an attack by Russia or Iran or false flag. Something that they have planned well in advance.
Just ask yourself, what would Hitler do after a successful attack on the central government?
Encourage your supporters. Check
Explain Nothing. Check
Silence critics of your own party. Check
Do the same thing again on a larger scale. In progress..
| by Anonymous | reply 3 | 01/11/2021 |
By January 1933, German politics was in a tailspin—unemployment had hit 24%, with 6 million out of work. A new government was desperately needed. After a series of clandestine meetings of behind-the-scenes political players in a posh Berlin villa, Hitler emerged as the secret choice to be appointed chancellor by President Paul von Hindenburg.
However, the secret arrangement depended on a delicately balanced, multi-party cabinet. Then, just hours before his scheduled swearing in by President Hindenburg, the Nazi leader demanded that his prospective cabinet ministers agree to new elections within six weeks—a move that would affirm the Nazis’ hold on power
| by Anonymous | reply 4 | 01/11/2021 |
Ginni Thomas couldn't get Clarence to deliver the Court?
She's behind the insurrection movement.
| by Anonymous | reply 5 | 01/11/2021 |
Ginni Thomas couldn't get Clarence to deliver the Court?
She's behind the insurrection movement.
I was thinking that too! If Clarence offers to throw the January SC potluck at his house - say no everyone (except for you, Amy Covid Barrett)
| by Anonymous | reply 6 | 01/11/2021 |
[quote] There were no noted dissents from any of the court’s nine justices.
Wait, count again, that can't be right.
| by Anonymous | reply 7 | 01/11/2021 |
I remember when the term ‘media circus’ was an idiom, now it’s literal.
| by Anonymous | reply 8 | 01/11/2021 |
