Insurrection 2021

[Disheveled Human]

This wasn't a normal case. We had over half the states and an entire political party throw their lot in. The litigants by themselves are an army of lawyers and you're telling me NONE of them could file a case?

You got cheated and nobody outside of the losing party gives a shit. For fuck sakes do something about it or shut the fuck up.

 

[FAQnews Correspondent]

This wasn't a normal case. We had over half the states and an entire political party throw their lot in. The litigants by themselves are an army of lawyers and you're telling me NONE of them could file a case?

Nope, but they can hear this.

Supreme Court Hears Holocaust Survivors’ Cases Against Hungary and Germany

The justices struggled to decide whether a 1976 law that bars most suits against other nations allows Jewish victims to sue over the theft of their property.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Random Internet Person]

https://twitter.com/SecretService/status/1341457389225164800

Based days are coming again.

View attachment 1804559

What do you think this means? The Occam's Razor in me says it's just a generic Christmas-related posts for the public about Santa or some shit, but the 2020 "Anything Goes" pessimist in me is baffled.

I've been promised bombs that fizzled out for too long. I can't get excited anymore.

This year they will help santa wiretap the grinch

Not gonna lie, I'd watch that.

As a Canadian who loved laughing at all the faggot lefty garbage when they cried. Now I am getting a taste of the cope coming from republicans and MAGA people this shit is awesome. Please do not stop. start a civil war soon, I made a large investment in popcorn do not disappoint me.

Wow, is this a glowing Canuck? I could retort with something about Justin Trudeau, but you have to understand only one side is willing to back up the Internet talk in this country.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

This wasn't a normal case. We had over half the states and an entire political party throw their lot in. The litigants by themselves are an army of lawyers and you're telling me NONE of them could file a case?

Well, yes, if all you're doing is political theater, led by the AG of Texas, who wants to be the Governor of Texas or maybe a Senator from Texas, it's going to be hard to file a case with any basis in law.

Trump has taken in $200 mill from gullible boomers- probably over $300 mill at this point. If he was serious about overturning the results of the election, why hasn't he hired on actual Supreme Court guns on his staff, guys like Paul Clement, rather than Giuliani- who is a politician not a lawyer- and some ho he saw on Fox News? Real Supreme Court specialists were there for Bush v. Gore, they aren't now. He isn't short of money.. his only problem is that credible lawyers don't want to embarrass themselves by filing joke cases.

 

[WhimsicalTrolli]

Most of them sound more like this
View attachment 1805023
Or this
View attachment 1805032
You'd have to leave whatever hugbox you get your news from to know that though.

And you see most of them fall to the "muh nigger votes" like the sand nigger who doxxed a canvasser's children for "muh nigger votes". If you want to talk about hugboxes that's not me, I've been cheering china's takeover for weeks.

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

Saying you won't hear a case on the outcome of the Presidential Election, due to "standing" isn't politically a good look. If I was SCOTUS and wanted to nip this in the bud I'd take the case on hear all the evidence and if it wasn't up to scratch tell them to fuck off. You want at least to give the impression you have some transparency of Democracy.

 

[Disheveled Human]

Wow, is this a glowing Canuck? I could retort with something about Justin Trudeau, but you have to understand only one side is willing to back up the Internet talk in this country.

You are acting like I give a shit. The fact I am chatting on kiwi farms is a good indication I have no say in what happens in society so what makes you think you are any different.

 

[King's Gambit Accepted]

This wasn't a normal case. We had over half the states and an entire political party throw their lot in. The litigants by themselves are an army of lawyers and you're telling me NONE of them could file a case?

SCOTUS gets hundreds of appeals each year and can only hear some of them. Trump's lawsuits were not heard by SCOTUS because SCOTUS chose not to.

If just 4 justices believed there was an important federal issue and stake and agreed to hear the case, it would have been heard.

I suppose the other possibility is that Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, Alito, ACB, and Kavanaugh are all in league with Dominion and Hugo Chavez.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

Saying you won't hear a case on the outcome of the Presidential Election, due to "standing" isn't politically a good look. If I was SCOTUS and wanted to nip this in the bud I'd take the case on hear all the evidence and if it wasn't up to scratch tell them to fuck off. You want at least to give the impression you have some transparency of Democracy.

And the fact that you think the law should take stupid lolsuits seriously in a vain attempt to assuage the feefees of losers is why you aren't a judge.

 

[Sanshain]

And the fact that you think the law should take stupid lolsuits seriously in a vain attempt to assange the feefees of losers is why you aren't a judge.

What would an Iranian know about American law?

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

What would an Iranian know about American law?

I don't know, bud. Why don't you know what an American five-year old could be expected to know about American law or elections?

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

And the fact that you think the law should take stupid lolsuits seriously in a vain attempt to assuage the feefees of losers is why you aren't a judge.

It's a state bringing a case to the Supreme Court. It's a historical moment. Saying you won't even hear the case due to "standing" is like saying "just fuck off, they can do whatever, fuck laws". When SCOTUS says "fuck laws" where are we headed?

 

[WhimsicalTrolli]

So Trump supporters on the thread are in a "big box" but it's always the same people who negreacts to people with different opinions if they are not "orange man bad" 👁👁 you can't throw stones at glass houses.

 

[Random Internet Person]

You are acting like I give a shit. The fact I am chatting on kiwi farms is a good indication I have no say in what happens in society so what makes you think you are any different.

I'm just saying, just be careful. When it comes to politics, you could force Null to actually do something as an admin and the owner.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

It's a state bringing a case to the Supreme Court. It's a historical moment. Saying you won't even hear the case due to "standing" is like saying "just fuck off, they can do whatever, fuck laws". When SCOTUS says "fuck laws" where are we headed?

States bring cases against states all the time.

It's just that there's usually some basis in law for what they're doing. In this case, there wasn't. Pretty clear cut.

 

[Taco]

Saying you won't hear a case on the outcome of the Presidential Election, due to "standing" isn't politically a good look.

Perhaps the Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment so you don't have them making decisions based on what's "politically a good look" and instead citing legal documents like the US Constitution to rule the plaintiffs have a lack of standing .

 

[Grandpa Simpson]

States bring cases against states all the time.

It's just that there's usually some basis in law for what they're doing. In this case, there wasn't. Pretty clear cut.

You speak as if SCOTUS is immune to the political climate, and we know they aren't. So they could've thrown some cold water on this fire and ruled on the case. But instead they've decided to kick this flaming paper bag down the road. Why.

 

[Shadfan666xxx000]

And the fact that you think the law should take stupid lolsuits seriously in a vain attempt to assuage the feefees of losers is why you aren't a judge.

So we foster resentment in 70 million Americans and a huge portion of the political apparatus on the left and right? Going Shapiro is a great idea with an anonymous Karen but here we have to account for massive social forces in terms of institutional trust and transparency which have already eroded for years on end even before the coof.

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

You speak as if SCOTUS is immune to the political climate, and we know they aren't. So they could've thrown some cold water on this fire and ruled on the case. But instead they've decided to kick this flaming paper bag down the road. Why.

As you would know if you'd read the ruling, if they hadn't dismissed it outright, they would have just had a discussion about how it was bullshit, refused to grant relief, and moved on.

And you still wouldn't be happy, so buck up, sunshine.

 

[Hollywood Hulk Hogan]

You speak as if SCOTUS is immune to the political climate, and we know they aren't. So they could've thrown some cold water on this fire and ruled on the case. But instead they've decided to kick this flaming paper bag down the road. Why.

Even Trump's own appointees thought his case was retarded. He lost. Get over it, snowflake