Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Oh I have no clue what other peoples reasonings are. I’m just guessing that it will be laughed out of court and then another definitive stamp can be marked on these BS claims. How many dozen cases have flopped so far? Some people never learnSo instead of just denying it completely & removing the slightest hint of any legitimacy, SCOTUS accepted it specifically just to laugh at it?
Interesting take.
You need to monitor what your monkey is posting, it's making you sound stupid...er
after it gets laughed out of SCOTUS what will you say. SCOTUS is corrupt?
this suit is supplementary; the military is in control!
That little part of jurat where each named defendant agreed to defend and support the constitution...
DEREK JOHNSON DECODES FROM TRUMPS SPEECH
Ep. 2935b - Evidence Already In, The [DS] Got Caught, It’s Perfectly Documented For All To See
Get The Same Tactical Flashlight I Use For Self-Defense Here: Click Here --> http://www.fighterflare.com Get 20% OFF By Using Promo Code "Black20" The [DS] is panicking, they are not in the drivers seat, they are now reacting to everything the patr…www.bitchute.com
operationdisclosureofficial.com
Here is how anyone can track this case.
(Reader: Lurch) SCOTUS Docket # 22-380
Patriots, we see and hear all kinds of information, the latest being about the SCOTUS Case 22-380. In case there is any doubt, the SCOTUS IS hearing this case.
Patriots, we see and hear all kinds of information, the latest being about the SCOTUS Case 22-380. In case there is any doubt, the SCOTUS IS hearing this case.below is the link for the SCOTUS website and below that the search results for #22-380. It IS on the Docket.
Tuesday at 8:23 PM November 29thUS Supreme Court docket No. 22-380
Docket Files:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-380.html
No, they violated their oath of office by siding with alleged fraudsters. The wanted investigation was to save the Constitutional Republic. The other members did not think it was worth saving. That violates their oath of office.Good luck! You're gonna need it!
They did investigate the bogus claims of fraud, which were still bogus after investigating, and they did wait out for the court case decisions with alleged fraud claims, and did hand recounts and signature audits....then they followed the law, and certified their election results....
Exactly what is laughable about the case? They clearly violated their oath of office. Just tell me what is laughable.I’m glad they did… now when the laugh it out of court the crazy Right can’t claim that the corrupt court blocked the case from being heard.
Well they didn’t clearly violate anything which is why the case has been tossed and appealed. Now scotus can put their stamp of termination on it which most sane people know is going to happen and the nutballs like you can move your deep state conspiracy focus to blame SCOTUSExactly what is laughable about the case? They clearly violated their oath of office. Just tell me what is laughable.
Wrong.Well they didn’t clearly violate anything which is why the case has been tossed and appealed. Now scotus can put their stamp of termination on it which most sane people know is going to happen and the nutballs like you can move your deep state conspiracy focus to blame SCOTUS
Brilliant argument!Wrong.
All you deserve.Brilliant argument!
It’s not about me deserving anything. It’s about you being able to present smart ideas, accurate facts and sound arguments…. Something you fail miserably at and apparently now you’re not even going to try. HaAll you deserve.
The facts I have posted about 22-380 are accurate,It’s not about me deserving anything. It’s about you being able to present smart ideas, accurate facts and sound arguments…. Something you fail miserably at and apparently now you’re not even going to try. Ha
Incorrect. You keep repeating that people are violating their oath of office. That’s not truthfulThe facts I have posted about 22-380 are accurate,
The SC decides that. But it is clear they violated their oath. And don't you ever tell me what is truthful.Incorrect. You keep repeating that people are violating their oath of office. That’s not truthful
You’re an admitted liar, so you could use my help with the truth. Especially when it comes to legal matters.The SC decides that. But it is clear they violated their oath. And don't you ever tell me what is truthful.
