Supreme Court To Hear Case To Reinstate Donald Trump Over 'Rigged' Election

[byron]

Supreme Court To Hear Case To Reinstate Donald Trump Over 'Rigged' Election

The U.S. Supreme Court is reportedly reconsidering hearing the Brunson v. Adams lawsuit, after previously dismissing it earlier this year. The lawsuit appears to be seeking to remove President Joe Biden, 80, from the White House and reinstate former ...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Saltwater60]

This is a losing strategy since I would think most people trust the USA elections and see this as Trump being a baby.
I’m not sure how the Supreme Court could put him back in the white house unless there is proof of illegal voting but I don’t think it’s there. This is a bad look for the Supreme Court and will spur on the liberals of packing the court to change its control and remove some justices. Bad move all around IMO.

 

[Grimscale]

I’m not sure how the Supreme Court could put him back in the white house unless there is proof of illegal voting but I don’t think it’s there.

Sure seemed like the evidence was there. We have seen many instances in the election thread showing that there were discrepancies, corruption, and illegal behavior in numerous states.
It just needs to be put in front of a Judge.

But I don't believe the S.C. will actually remove this blight on our history, and if they did, I expect they would require a new election.

 

[speerchucker]

Supreme Court forgive my ignorance but I think that's the one where you have all judge's making the decision no jury so they're fighting against a stacked deck even here in Australia our last federal election there was actually video footage of people catching Australia Post workers dumping postal votes because they knew those areas were primarily right wing voters like your republicans yet nobody was charged over it can't win in your country we can't win in ours

 

[livingston]

I doubt they will hear the case.... This is almost a click bait article.

 

[Paxal]

Supreme Court To Hear Case To Reinstate Donald Trump Over 'Rigged' Election

The U.S. Supreme Court is reportedly reconsidering hearing the Brunson v. Adams lawsuit, after previously dismissing it earlier this year. The lawsuit appears to be seeking to remove President Joe Biden, 80, from the White House and reinstate former ...

www.yahoo.com

I dont see the court installing anyone. But, they could rule that they see election fraud and perhaps award damages. That would by itself open the door to all sorts of suits.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

Supreme Court forgive my ignorance but I think that's the one where you have all judge's making the decision no jury so they're fighting against a stacked deck even here in Australia our last federal election there was actually video footage of people catching Australia Post workers dumping postal votes because they knew those areas were primarily right wing voters like your republicans yet nobody was charged over it can't win in your country we can't win in

Sadly that sounds like the same playbook...

 

[Dr. Evil]

If only...

 

[Willyone]

Another nothingburger.

 

[FP1201]

This is a losing strategy since I would think most people trust the USA elections and see this as Trump being a baby.
I’m not sure how the Supreme Court could put him back in the white house unless there is proof of illegal voting but I don’t think it’s there. This is a bad look for the Supreme Court and will spur on the liberals of packing the court to change its control and remove some justices. Bad move all around IMO.

One has to remember that SCOTUS is petitioned by many to be heard and THEY select the Cases they will hear...there's a better chance of ordering Sno-Cones in Hell than this ever being granted Cert.

 

[dwa12479]

Yawn.

 

[GreggWNY]

Fox News apparently didn't think there was any fraud in the 2020 elections. They just neglected to mention it to their viewers. Can we please move on to more pressing issues instead of rehashing the 2020 elections.

 

[FP1201]

Fox News apparently didn't think there was any fraud in the 2020 elections. They just neglected to mention it to their viewers. Can we please move on to more pressing issues instead of rehashing the 2020 elections.

Most of us realize there is a lot of bullshit in politics, just look at the shit show Congressmen like Schiff pulled with fake Russian Dosiers and the complicit DNC shills. There have been countless reports, affidavits, sworn testimony, Video footage, et.al and yet the Media and those holding the reigns of government will do all they can to dismiss all the claims of impropriety lest it be discovered them true. You may not like it, nor agree, but if there is any evidence then it must be proved either way or there will never be acceptance of any election results.`

 

[Dr. Evil]

Fox News apparently didn't think there was any fraud in the 2020 elections. They just neglected to mention it to their viewers. Can we please move on to more pressing issues instead of rehashing the 2020 elections.

They were too busy calling Arizona shortly after polls opened. What's more important than calling out election cheating when it occurs and trying when ever possible to go after it? Moving on is exactly what "they" want you to do.

 

[RooftopKorean]

I'm pretty sure in light of the recent Katie Hobbs scandal. Where there is proof of Mexican interference in the AZ governor elections, this is why SCOTUS is open to hearing the Trump case.

 

[repete]

Never happen! Think about it for a second, lets just say that they uncover massive fraud and Biden admits he cheated. Would they declare Trump the winner? What happens with the rest of the election cycle? Does Trump get a full 4 years? So do we from now on have a POTUS election say May 1st and elect others in Nov? What about all the laws that Biden has signed? Do they stay or do they go? What about all the money that's been sent to Ukraine and the 10%? Can you even imagine the uproar from the left? The "summer of love" and "mostly peaceful protests" would look like a cub scout meeting compared to the shit storm this would cause and that's why it will never happen.
IF there was real proof that could overturn the election we would never know about, it would be the biggest cover up in world history!

 

[Duke]

In other news they arrested the Jan. 6th bear......

 

[Grimscale]

there's a better chance of ordering Sno-Cones in Hell than this ever being granted Cert.

Each lower level of hell is colder than the one above (Dante).
After 2 years of Dementia Joe and the Ho we have to at least have reached a level that is at 32 degrees F.
Right?

Can we please move on to more pressing issues instead of rehashing the 2020 elections.

What is more pressing than the theft of the U.S. .gov from The People?

 

[Saltwater60]

Fox News apparently didn't think there was any fraud in the 2020 elections. They just neglected to mention it to their viewers. Can we please move on to more pressing issues instead of rehashing the 2020 elections.

Agreed. Prove it in court or move it along. If they stay stuck in this they cheated in 2020 that caused us to essentially lose 2022, and will cause losses in 2024. This is not a winning strategy. Was there fraud? Yes, there is fraud in every election but is there proof enough to overturn the Biden victory? I dunno and I don’t think anyone does except for maybe a few people in the world and I doubt we will ever know for sure.
I would say the overwhelming majority of Americans trust the election process in the USA. All democrats trust what happened, most independents do, and o would venture to guess about 50% of republicans think trump lost. All told I would say 75% of Americans don’t believe it. I get that the Republican Party is split on this and they are in a tough spot with this next election.

 

[Zerex]

Having denied it once, it seems peculiar that they are even considering hearing the appeal to grant certiorari.

It could only be that the DNC has decided to order SCOTUS to reinstate Trump, so that they may impeach him again,

By the time Trump removes Bidens Cabinet and all the laws passed and signed by Biden are moot, and declared illegal/unconstitutional it will be 2032.

A madmans clever strategy for sure.

It prevents Trump from running in 2024, as he will have been deemed to have served two terms.

 

[pshift]

... yawn again (in sympathy).

 

[John Stark]

If they stay stuck in this they cheated in 2020 that caused us to essentially lose 2022, and will cause losses in 2024. This is not a winning strategy.

Translation: "Don't bring up the blatant voter fraud and rigged elections that went on in numerous states, in direct violation of those state's own laws, because it will cause losses in future, blatantly rigged elections that we can't win anyways."

WTF?

There is no doubt whatsoever that several states clearly violated their own laws and allowed millions and millions of illegal votes to be counted, including from illegal ballot harvesting, drop boxes, illegal early and late voting schemes, mail in ballots, and so on. Oddly enough, those vote tallies were in states close enough to be within the margin of win/lose for those states. Take those votes away for a certain candidate, and guess who did and did not win the 2020 election?

There is no doubt this whatsoever. Numerous states allowed votes to be counted that were clearly against their own laws, all of them using covid bullshit to do it. That is a matter of public fucking record pal.

Apparently like many so-called Americans, you want to just move on from the egregious violations of the Rights of Americans that occurred during the completely illegal and fascist actions that took place against the citizens of your own country during Operation WuFlu.

Ho hum, stick your head back in the fucking sand!

 

[RedBreast21]

There is no constitutional context for a presidential election to be overturned by SCOTUS that I am aware of. That would be considered too much power in one branch of government.

I'm not entirely sure SCOTUS has the power anyway. The people could petition for a new election. The grounds for that could come from the courts if enough evidence suggested but they couldn't order it. In short 2024. lol

 

[SomeSoldier]

They should punt this.

 

[John Stark]

There is no constitutional context for a presidential election to be overturned by SCOTUS that I am aware of. That would be considered too much power in one branch of government.

Do Federal judges try criminal cases?

Do they have the power to rule that laws have been broken in any given matter that has been legitimately brought before them?

Do they regularly rule not only on the outcome of cases based upon laws, but on the very constitutionality of those laws?

Do Federal judges regularly rule on laws created at every level of government, local, county, state, and Federal?

Have Federal judges ever ruled narrowly, broadly, and everything in between, when it comes to election law, and the applicability of it in cases at the various levels of government those election laws pertain to?

Do Federal judges have the power to rule that election law, criminal law, and so on, were properly or improperly applied in any given case that reaches their bench?

Have federal courts, including the Supreme Court, previously heard cases related to the election of a President, and determined the outcome of that case?

 

[JaguarJaguarGolf]

Didn't the Supreme Court hear Bush V. Gore ?

 

[RedBreast21]

Do Federal judges try criminal cases?

Do they have the power to rule that laws have been broken in any given matter that has been legitimately brought before them?

Do they regularly rule not only on the outcome of cases based upon laws, but on the very constitutionality of those laws?

Do Federal judges regularly rule on laws created at every level of government, local, county, state, and Federal?

Have Federal judges ever ruled narrowly, broadly, and everything in between, when it comes to election law, and the applicability of it in cases at the various levels of government those election laws pertain to?

Do Federal judges have the power to rule that election law, criminal law, and so on, were properly or improperly applied in any given case that reaches their bench?

Have federal courts, including the Supreme Court, previously heard cases related to the election of a President, and determined the outcome of that case?

Hmmm.......................I think SCOTUS ruled on NY's permit law. How did that turn out? No.....I'll standby what I posted.

 

[spat]

Having denied it once, it seems peculiar that they are even considering hearing the appeal to grant certiorari.

It could only be that the DNC has decided to order SCOTUS to reinstate Trump, so that they may impeach him again,

By the time Trump removes Bidens Cabinet and all the laws passed and signed by Biden are moot, and declared illegal/unconstitutional it will be 2032.

A madmans clever strategy for sure.

It prevents Trump from running in 2024, as he will have been deemed to have served two terms.

Nope, if Trump took over today he could run again.

The rule isn't 2 terms.

The rule is 1 day less than 10 years. So it's actually 2 and 1/2 terms.

The rule isn't 2 terms. It's 1 day less than 10 years.


But, ruling the 2020 election is invalid does not put Trump back in office. His term ended in Jan 2021. He would have to be elected again to get back into office.


As perverse as it sounds, if SCOTUS ruled the 2020 election was invalid, Nancy Pelosi would take office, since she was next in line for the presidency when Trump's term ended in Jan 2020.

The only saving grace for that would be how much it would frost Hillaries ass that Pelosi was the first female president LOL.

 

[Grimscale]

But, ruling the 2020 election is invalid does not put Trump back in office. His term ended in Jan 2021. He would have to be elected again to get back into office.

I think the reasoning is that if the ruling stated there was fraud/corruption/etc., and the ballots that would not have counted in the election were thrown out and the remainder counted, there would be a Trump win.
Or they rule the whole thing null and void and Nancy sits on the throne long enough for a real (supposedly) election to occur for the remainder of this term.

 

[stokes]

The only saving grace for that would be how much it would frost Hillaries ass that Pelosi was the first female president LOL.

Sure, her ass gets frosted while the rest of our asses gets burned.