Cadet Bone Spurs is neither man-enough nor patriot-enough to do that... it's all about him.,, and it's pathetic to see these losers still trying to enable that POS.
SCOTUS gives Trump the proverbial Middle Finger.
- Thread starter JLW
- Start date
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
Where are you getting all these blank ballots from ?Sure.....mark it all Dem or just for Biden and scribble a signature, even a verifying signature.....about 20 seconds per fake ballot. These should take at least 2 minutes per to verify properly....you know, looking at a real voter signature on file to the one on the ballot....so that would bee 260,000 minutes or 4333 hours. Seems like a bit of a daunting task unless you had about 1000 or so people verifying.How easy is it? Walk me through how you would cast a fake voteThat is an untrue statement.....we just know how easy it is to fake leftyflu mailin ballotsThe abundance of puppets that just believe everything Trump says is pretty unbelievable.but they took on Texas vs. Sneaky States.
Supreme Court denies GOP effort to block certification of Pennsylvania election results
President-elect Joe Biden forges ahead with transition plans as President Trump refuses to concede and keeps losing election-related lawsuits. Follow here for the latest.www.cnn.com
A one sentence refusal!
Hmmmm...maybe it's a better example.
No they didn't. That one was just filed today. I bet it lasts as long as the PA one did. A day.
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
Not a scam just an option to vote which has been around for decades.We all knew that, Dems are too lazy to really vote so the leftyflu mailin scam worked beautifully.That scenario was predicted to happen. Were you not paying attention? Dems promoted mail in. Trump didn’t. We all knew Trump would have the early majority of votes and then Biden would catch up with the mail ins. It was predicted and announced to happen prior to the electionNot really. I think anyone who was leading a state race by 130,000 votes at midnight and woke up at say 6 to see he was behind would question the results.....especially when it happened in multiple states and all the libbers only vote by leftyflu mailin.If it can’t be proved then why is POTUS claiming that it happened like it’s fact. Rather irresponsible don’t you think?Give me a break. Trying to prove massive mailin fraud would be extremely difficult, almost a difficult as verifying some 130,000 mailins in just about 7 hours overnight by a handful of counters, all for Sleepy Joe.Well if there was evidence that there were fake ballots then a court would take action. No evidence no action. All y’all got is empty words and accusations. Grow upHard to overturn those fake leftyflu mailin ballots
Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.www.npr.org
The SCOTUS rejects Trump's attempted coup against the United States of American and rejects the GOP bid to reverse Pennsylvania's election results.
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
Well said. I agreeIMHO, Voting by mail was widely supported by Biden but not by Trump. In the minds of voters, Trump wanted his people to vote at the polls, which goes along with his ignore the virus attitude. Biden wanted his people to vote by mail because of his message of preventing the spread of the virus. Thus democrats tended to vote by mail and Trump supporters voted at the polls or early voting.That scenario was predicted to happen. Were you not paying attention? Dems promoted mail in. Trump didn’t. We all knew Trump would have the early majority of votes and then Biden would catch up with the mail ins. It was predicted and announced to happen prior to the electionNot really. I think anyone who was leading a state race by 130,000 votes at midnight and woke up at say 6 to see he was behind would question the results.....especially when it happened in multiple states and all the libbers only vote by leftyflu mailin.If it can’t be proved then why is POTUS claiming that it happened like it’s fact. Rather irresponsible don’t you think?Give me a break. Trying to prove massive mailin fraud would be extremely difficult, almost a difficult as verifying some 130,000 mailins in just about 7 hours overnight by a handful of counters, all for Sleepy Joe.Well if there was evidence that there were fake ballots then a court would take action. No evidence no action. All y’all got is empty words and accusations. Grow upHard to overturn those fake leftyflu mailin ballotsSupreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.
The SCOTUS rejects Trump's attempted coup against the United States of American and rejects the GOP bid to reverse Pennsylvania's election results.
Trump simple missed the fact that people are more likely to vote if they vote by mail. Had he encourage voting by mail like Biden, the results may have been different.
But the Dominion crap is NOT in Texas's argument, is it?
Toro
Diamond Member
Dr Grump
Platinum Member
Right. Gun shows. The be-all and end-all of ways to gather your news and take the pulse of the world.
Good grief.
It was a longshot. I never thought for a minute they would take the case.
- Dec 16, 2017
- 23,274
- 12,609
- 1,290
Even I agree, I think its time for trump to pack it up. Regardless of whether or not he has a legitimate case, we are seeing that the courts are not going to rule in his favor. This latest scotus ruling seems to be a telegraph that they are not having any of it.
He should show everyone he can be the bigger man and go ahead and conceed, for the benefit of a smooth transition. He doesn't need to be defiant til the end. When you see that things are not going to go your way, you can keep running into brick walls, or face reality and try to make it easier on yourself, and everyone else.
He should show everyone he can be the bigger man and go ahead and conceed, for the benefit of a smooth transition. He doesn't need to be defiant til the end. When you see that things are not going to go your way, you can keep running into brick walls, or face reality and try to make it easier on yourself, and everyone else.
DJT for Life
Gold Member
- Jun 21, 2017
- 3,468
- 899
- 195
It doesn't have to be. The PA Sec of State disregarded State Election laws. The State of Texas has sued 4 other
States...The Constitution says only the SCOTUS can settle arguments between states.
SCOTUS has given the 4 states until Thursday to supply them with a reason not to take up the case.
It only takes 4 Justices to accept a case. Alito said a few weeks back when the court refused a case. The vote
was 5-4. This case is pretty much along those lines thus I'm pretty sure the case will be taken up by the
court. Alito warned the court that we will see this again and we will have to decide the outcome of
the election..
We'll know by Friday whether they take it up or not.
flacaltenn
Diamond Member
Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.
SCOTUS slammed the brakes on Trump's attempted coup against the newly elected government of the United States of America and rejected his and the GOP's bid to reverse the Pennsylvania's election results.
Don't think people are following the ball here.. Of course the US SupCt. isn't gonna issue an injunction tossing out 10s of thousands of ballots in Pennsylvania.. And contrary to some of low informed on this thread -- it wasn't an Enbanque ruling.. Alito is the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. It was HIS decision.. There was no vote. No drama about Barrett...
And that's to be expected if the case has never seen a court room, never appraised on the ACTUAL evidence, and never gone thru discovery.. Those things SHOULD HAPPEN...
The issue is the Penn SupCt and their cover-up of their extremely questionable decision TO MAKE LAW -- just prior to the election -- IN DIRECT CONFLICT with the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania that STATES SPECIFICALLY "how absentee balloting works".. NOTE -- this is not StateHouse law -- it's spelled out in their STATE CONSTITUTION and their Supreme Ct violated that.
If you go back to a month before the election, the GOV and Sec State of Penn ASKED the legislators to make some changes in the "mail-in" requirements.. It was THEIR JOB to do that. The StateHouse refused saying it was too close to the election and told them to go away..
It was the Penn SupCt that gave the Gov and Sec State MORE than what they asked for.. And every one of their REJECTIONS on securing discovery and getting access to evidence is just arrogance and protecting their OWN ASSES... NONE of those rejections were by large majorities.. The decisions split about 5-4 in most cases..
SOOOO... Now comes the brighter folks who KNOW that US Sup Ct will only hear whining based on FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.. Like the case just booked in SupCt by Atty Gens of several states starting with Texas.. What THEY are doing is giving up on the quick fix -- asking for tossing out specific large piles of votes -- and FOCUSING on the Federal aspects of several states VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTIONS to make "emergency law" just prior to the election. Penn did it so close to election that it was TIMED to not be possible to appeal or overturn..
This is a SOLID approach.. If the various states named as defendants VIOLATED FEDERAL election laws -- which says the various state CONSTITUTION and election laws lawfully passed in their StateHouses are the ONLY legal way to change election procedure..
Applicants are not asking for STATE uniformity.. Just asking that the election process is CONSTITUTIONALLY defined or modified by their StateHouses and not courts MAKING LAWS in violation thereof... In addition, in Penn. -- the rogue court there gave them licence to "heal ballots" on a precinct by precinct basis -- which clearly violates the Bill of Rights "equal protection" clause..
It's a way for the SupCt to tell the defendants, that their "last minute end arounds" violated Federal law and Constitution,.. And OPEN UP the state courts to HEAR the cases on merit and allow discovery.
The latest brush-off by the rogue Penn SUpCt simply stated that the request to hear the case "would cause chaos".. That's not sufficient. That's not even professional.. Laws were violated. We need to make sure this will NEVER happen again..
Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 126,711
- 121,327
- 3,635
LOLSupreme Court denies GOP effort to block certification of Pennsylvania election results
President-elect Joe Biden forges ahead with transition plans as President Trump refuses to concede and keeps losing election-related lawsuits. Follow here for the latest.
A one sentence refusal!
Keep hope alive, trumptard.
L.K.Eder
unbannable non-troll
lol. babble babble.Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.
SCOTUS slammed the brakes on Trump's attempted coup against the newly elected government of the United States of America and rejected his and the GOP's bid to reverse the Pennsylvania's election results.
Don't think people are following the ball here.. Of course the US SupCt. isn't gonna issue an injunction tossing out 10s of thousands of ballots in Pennsylvania.. And contrary to some of low informed on this thread -- it wasn't an Enbanque ruling.. Alito is the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. It was HIS decision.. There was no vote. No drama about Barrett...
And that's to be expected if the case has never seen a court room, never appraised on the ACTUAL evidence, and never gone thru discovery.. Those things SHOULD HAPPEN...
The issue is the Penn SupCt and their cover-up of their extremely questionable decision TO MAKE LAW -- just prior to the election -- IN DIRECT CONFLICT with the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania that STATES SPECIFICALLY "how absentee balloting works".. NOTE -- this is not StateHouse law -- it's spelled out in their STATE CONSTITUTION and their Supreme Ct violated that.
If you go back to a month before the election, the GOV and Sec State of Penn ASKED the legislators to make some changes in the "mail-in" requirements.. It was THEIR JOB to do that. The StateHouse refused saying it was too close to the election and told them to go away..
It was the Penn SupCt that gave the Gov and Sec State MORE than what they asked for.. And every one of their REJECTIONS on securing discovery and getting access to evidence is just arrogance and protecting their OWN ASSES... NONE of those rejections were by large majorities.. The decisions split about 5-4 in most cases..
SOOOO... Now comes the brighter folks who KNOW that US Sup Ct will only hear whining based on FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.. Like the case just booked in SupCt by Atty Gens of several states starting with Texas.. What THEY are doing is giving up on the quick fix -- asking for tossing out specific large piles of votes -- and FOCUSING on the Federal aspects of several states VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTIONS to make "emergency law" just prior to the election. Penn did it so close to election that it was TIMED to not be possible to appeal or overturn..
This is a SOLID approach.. If the various states named as defendants VIOLATED FEDERAL election laws -- which says the various state CONSTITUTION and election laws lawfully passed in their StateHouses are the ONLY legal way to change election procedure..
Applicants are not asking for STATE uniformity.. Just asking that the election process is CONSTITUTIONALLY defined or modified by their StateHouses and not courts MAKING LAWS in violation thereof... In addition, in Penn. -- the rogue court there gave them licence to "heal ballots" on a precinct by precinct basis -- which clearly violates the Bill of Rights "equal protection" clause..
It's a way for the SupCt to tell the defendants, that their "last minute end arounds" violated Federal law and Constitution,.. And OPEN UP the state courts to HEAR the cases on merit and allow discovery.
The latest brush-off by the rogue Penn SUpCt simply stated that the request to hear the case "would cause chaos".. That's not sufficient. That's not even professional.. Laws were violated. We need to make sure this will NEVER happen again..
Alito is the not the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. Pennsylvania is simply in the circuit region assigned to alito.
it was not alito's decision. Alito presented this "case" to the court. the court denied the application. therefore it was decided by the court, not alito alone. maybe there was no need for a formal vote, as this was prima facie idiotic. but the order is clear. if there was a dissenting voice, clarence thomas would have let us known.
and you queef about low informed.
Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 126,711
- 121,327
- 3,635
2024! 'cause **** your feelings failed miserably in 2020.
flacaltenn
Diamond Member
lol. babble babble.Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.
SCOTUS slammed the brakes on Trump's attempted coup against the newly elected government of the United States of America and rejected his and the GOP's bid to reverse the Pennsylvania's election results.
Don't think people are following the ball here.. Of course the US SupCt. isn't gonna issue an injunction tossing out 10s of thousands of ballots in Pennsylvania.. And contrary to some of low informed on this thread -- it wasn't an Enbanque ruling.. Alito is the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. It was HIS decision.. There was no vote. No drama about Barrett...
And that's to be expected if the case has never seen a court room, never appraised on the ACTUAL evidence, and never gone thru discovery.. Those things SHOULD HAPPEN...
The issue is the Penn SupCt and their cover-up of their extremely questionable decision TO MAKE LAW -- just prior to the election -- IN DIRECT CONFLICT with the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania that STATES SPECIFICALLY "how absentee balloting works".. NOTE -- this is not StateHouse law -- it's spelled out in their STATE CONSTITUTION and their Supreme Ct violated that.
If you go back to a month before the election, the GOV and Sec State of Penn ASKED the legislators to make some changes in the "mail-in" requirements.. It was THEIR JOB to do that. The StateHouse refused saying it was too close to the election and told them to go away..
It was the Penn SupCt that gave the Gov and Sec State MORE than what they asked for.. And every one of their REJECTIONS on securing discovery and getting access to evidence is just arrogance and protecting their OWN ASSES... NONE of those rejections were by large majorities.. The decisions split about 5-4 in most cases..
SOOOO... Now comes the brighter folks who KNOW that US Sup Ct will only hear whining based on FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.. Like the case just booked in SupCt by Atty Gens of several states starting with Texas.. What THEY are doing is giving up on the quick fix -- asking for tossing out specific large piles of votes -- and FOCUSING on the Federal aspects of several states VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTIONS to make "emergency law" just prior to the election. Penn did it so close to election that it was TIMED to not be possible to appeal or overturn..
This is a SOLID approach.. If the various states named as defendants VIOLATED FEDERAL election laws -- which says the various state CONSTITUTION and election laws lawfully passed in their StateHouses are the ONLY legal way to change election procedure..
Applicants are not asking for STATE uniformity.. Just asking that the election process is CONSTITUTIONALLY defined or modified by their StateHouses and not courts MAKING LAWS in violation thereof... In addition, in Penn. -- the rogue court there gave them licence to "heal ballots" on a precinct by precinct basis -- which clearly violates the Bill of Rights "equal protection" clause..
It's a way for the SupCt to tell the defendants, that their "last minute end arounds" violated Federal law and Constitution,.. And OPEN UP the state courts to HEAR the cases on merit and allow discovery.
The latest brush-off by the rogue Penn SUpCt simply stated that the request to hear the case "would cause chaos".. That's not sufficient. That's not even professional.. Laws were violated. We need to make sure this will NEVER happen again..
Alito is the not the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. Pennsylvania is simply in the circuit region assigned to alito.
it was not alito's decision. Alito presented this "case" to the court. the court denied the application. therefore it was decided by the court, not alito alone. maybe there was no need for a formal vote, as this was prima facie idiotic. but the order is clear. if there was a dissenting voice, clarence thomas would have let us known.
and you queef about low informed.
Really? I stand by what I said.. OTHER justices can object -- but there was no nine judge vote on the application..
And I stand by all the other analysis that you HAD TO IGNORE to pick this nit..
L.K.Eder
unbannable non-troll
how interesting. if you start your arrogant analysis with obvious errors, don't whine when the rest of your manifesto is discarded.lol. babble babble.Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.
SCOTUS slammed the brakes on Trump's attempted coup against the newly elected government of the United States of America and rejected his and the GOP's bid to reverse the Pennsylvania's election results.
Don't think people are following the ball here.. Of course the US SupCt. isn't gonna issue an injunction tossing out 10s of thousands of ballots in Pennsylvania.. And contrary to some of low informed on this thread -- it wasn't an Enbanque ruling.. Alito is the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. It was HIS decision.. There was no vote. No drama about Barrett...
And that's to be expected if the case has never seen a court room, never appraised on the ACTUAL evidence, and never gone thru discovery.. Those things SHOULD HAPPEN...
The issue is the Penn SupCt and their cover-up of their extremely questionable decision TO MAKE LAW -- just prior to the election -- IN DIRECT CONFLICT with the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania that STATES SPECIFICALLY "how absentee balloting works".. NOTE -- this is not StateHouse law -- it's spelled out in their STATE CONSTITUTION and their Supreme Ct violated that.
If you go back to a month before the election, the GOV and Sec State of Penn ASKED the legislators to make some changes in the "mail-in" requirements.. It was THEIR JOB to do that. The StateHouse refused saying it was too close to the election and told them to go away..
It was the Penn SupCt that gave the Gov and Sec State MORE than what they asked for.. And every one of their REJECTIONS on securing discovery and getting access to evidence is just arrogance and protecting their OWN ASSES... NONE of those rejections were by large majorities.. The decisions split about 5-4 in most cases..
SOOOO... Now comes the brighter folks who KNOW that US Sup Ct will only hear whining based on FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.. Like the case just booked in SupCt by Atty Gens of several states starting with Texas.. What THEY are doing is giving up on the quick fix -- asking for tossing out specific large piles of votes -- and FOCUSING on the Federal aspects of several states VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTIONS to make "emergency law" just prior to the election. Penn did it so close to election that it was TIMED to not be possible to appeal or overturn..
This is a SOLID approach.. If the various states named as defendants VIOLATED FEDERAL election laws -- which says the various state CONSTITUTION and election laws lawfully passed in their StateHouses are the ONLY legal way to change election procedure..
Applicants are not asking for STATE uniformity.. Just asking that the election process is CONSTITUTIONALLY defined or modified by their StateHouses and not courts MAKING LAWS in violation thereof... In addition, in Penn. -- the rogue court there gave them licence to "heal ballots" on a precinct by precinct basis -- which clearly violates the Bill of Rights "equal protection" clause..
It's a way for the SupCt to tell the defendants, that their "last minute end arounds" violated Federal law and Constitution,.. And OPEN UP the state courts to HEAR the cases on merit and allow discovery.
The latest brush-off by the rogue Penn SUpCt simply stated that the request to hear the case "would cause chaos".. That's not sufficient. That's not even professional.. Laws were violated. We need to make sure this will NEVER happen again..
Alito is the not the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. Pennsylvania is simply in the circuit region assigned to alito.
it was not alito's decision. Alito presented this "case" to the court. the court denied the application. therefore it was decided by the court, not alito alone. maybe there was no need for a formal vote, as this was prima facie idiotic. but the order is clear. if there was a dissenting voice, clarence thomas would have let us known.
and you queef about low informed.
Really? I stand by what I said.. OTHER justices can object -- but there was no nine judge vote on the application..
And I stand by all the other analysis that you HAD TO IGNORE to pick this nit..
- Jan 19, 2010
- 83,928
- 84,335
- 3,605
- Jan 19, 2010
- 83,928
- 84,335
- 3,605
- Jan 19, 2010
- 83,928
- 84,335
- 3,605
flacaltenn
Diamond Member
how interesting. if you start your arrogant analysis with obvious errors, don't whine when the rest of your manifesto is discarded.lol. babble babble.Supreme Court Rejects GOP Bid To Reverse Pennsylvania Election Results
The lawsuit argued a 2019 state law authorizing universal mail-in voting was unconstitutional and that all ballots cast by mail in the general election in Pennsylvania should be thrown out.
SCOTUS slammed the brakes on Trump's attempted coup against the newly elected government of the United States of America and rejected his and the GOP's bid to reverse the Pennsylvania's election results.
Don't think people are following the ball here.. Of course the US SupCt. isn't gonna issue an injunction tossing out 10s of thousands of ballots in Pennsylvania.. And contrary to some of low informed on this thread -- it wasn't an Enbanque ruling.. Alito is the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. It was HIS decision.. There was no vote. No drama about Barrett...
And that's to be expected if the case has never seen a court room, never appraised on the ACTUAL evidence, and never gone thru discovery.. Those things SHOULD HAPPEN...
The issue is the Penn SupCt and their cover-up of their extremely questionable decision TO MAKE LAW -- just prior to the election -- IN DIRECT CONFLICT with the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania that STATES SPECIFICALLY "how absentee balloting works".. NOTE -- this is not StateHouse law -- it's spelled out in their STATE CONSTITUTION and their Supreme Ct violated that.
If you go back to a month before the election, the GOV and Sec State of Penn ASKED the legislators to make some changes in the "mail-in" requirements.. It was THEIR JOB to do that. The StateHouse refused saying it was too close to the election and told them to go away..
It was the Penn SupCt that gave the Gov and Sec State MORE than what they asked for.. And every one of their REJECTIONS on securing discovery and getting access to evidence is just arrogance and protecting their OWN ASSES... NONE of those rejections were by large majorities.. The decisions split about 5-4 in most cases..
SOOOO... Now comes the brighter folks who KNOW that US Sup Ct will only hear whining based on FEDERAL LAW and FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.. Like the case just booked in SupCt by Atty Gens of several states starting with Texas.. What THEY are doing is giving up on the quick fix -- asking for tossing out specific large piles of votes -- and FOCUSING on the Federal aspects of several states VIOLATING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTIONS to make "emergency law" just prior to the election. Penn did it so close to election that it was TIMED to not be possible to appeal or overturn..
This is a SOLID approach.. If the various states named as defendants VIOLATED FEDERAL election laws -- which says the various state CONSTITUTION and election laws lawfully passed in their StateHouses are the ONLY legal way to change election procedure..
Applicants are not asking for STATE uniformity.. Just asking that the election process is CONSTITUTIONALLY defined or modified by their StateHouses and not courts MAKING LAWS in violation thereof... In addition, in Penn. -- the rogue court there gave them licence to "heal ballots" on a precinct by precinct basis -- which clearly violates the Bill of Rights "equal protection" clause..
It's a way for the SupCt to tell the defendants, that their "last minute end arounds" violated Federal law and Constitution,.. And OPEN UP the state courts to HEAR the cases on merit and allow discovery.
The latest brush-off by the rogue Penn SUpCt simply stated that the request to hear the case "would cause chaos".. That's not sufficient. That's not even professional.. Laws were violated. We need to make sure this will NEVER happen again..
Alito is the not the gate-keeper for all things 2020 election. Pennsylvania is simply in the circuit region assigned to alito.
it was not alito's decision. Alito presented this "case" to the court. the court denied the application. therefore it was decided by the court, not alito alone. maybe there was no need for a formal vote, as this was prima facie idiotic. but the order is clear. if there was a dissenting voice, clarence thomas would have let us known.
and you queef about low informed.
Really? I stand by what I said.. OTHER justices can object -- but there was no nine judge vote on the application..
And I stand by all the other analysis that you HAD TO IGNORE to pick this nit..
You haven't "discarded" much of ANYTHING significant that I said.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
Trump Says His Administration Has Their Eye on Iranian Sleeper Cells....- Started by candycorn
- Replies: 1
-
Zone1 In what ways is antisemitism “cloaked” as being against “just” Israel?
- Started by Lisa558
- Replies: 6
-
I'm not sure where to put this. woman is obviously operating on jungle instincts.- Started by the watcher
- Replies: 1
