Posted on 11/09/2020 5:43:08 AM PST by White Lives Matter
Had Twitter or Facebook been around in 2000, #HangingChads would have been trending for a month. Many of us remember the legal battles that ensued over Florida’s then-25 electoral votes.
The History Channel reminds us:
After a wild election night on November 7, 2000, during which TV networks first called the key state of Florida for Gore, then for Bush, followed by a concession by Gore that was soon rescinded, the results for who would be the nation’s 43rd president were simply too close to call.
In the 36 days that followed, Americans learned Gore had won the popular vote by 543,895 votes. But it’s winning the Electoral College that counts. As accusations of fraud and voter suppression, calls for recounts and the filing of lawsuits ensued, the terms “hanging chads,” “dimpled chads” and “pregnant chads” became part of the lexicon.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Barrett is an unknown entity on this to me. If she really is solid then Kavanaugh is the swing vote
It is also worth noting that Ruth Bader Ginsberg was an attorney for the radical left ACLU before joining SCOTUS. I am not aware of a single decision involving the ACLU from which she recused herself.
I heard Gorsuch instead of Roberts? What’s right?
BTW Thomas was personally lynched by “President elect” during his nomination, and Alito already ruled once.
If it gets to Supreme court, Trump gets fair hearing.
With Barrett on the court, I am quite sure that Roberts will vote with Thomas. He does not want to be in minority.
I have my doubts about Kavanaugh...not sure why, just a hunch.
Just get it to the court and let’s find out.
Add Clarence Thomas’s motivation in the mix.... Who was the Senator who defamed Justice Thomas ... a high-class lynching???
Oh that was chairman of Judiciary Committee, Senator BIDEN!
The guy who was publicly lynched, whose wife and children were humiliated in the most disgusting way by the alleged fraudsters. I would hope that would not sway his opinion, but make him open his eyes to the evidence before him.
This is about large scale election fraud.
That doesn’t mean that they will for sure vote FOR THE LAW. Roberts’ nasty comment about judges not being partisan was a mammoth lie. We will have to see what they do. The judges appointed by ‘our side’ are always unpredictable. I have often wondered if any are being blackmailed.
Ever notice the judges appointed by Democrats NEVER vote against their Party? Roberts’ should have never risen to the SCOTUS. Our mistake.
I have my doubts about Kavanaugh...not sure why, just a hunch.
**************************************
Me too. However, he was one of the 4 that would have stopped the PA mail in ballots before the election. I think it’s going to be up to ACB.
I agree.
I have no faith that Benedict Roberts will correctly rule on the merits of any election case brought before him.
“Barrett is an unknown entity on this to me.”
I don’t really trust her. A few seemingly silly things added together trigger me a little.
We may be thinking way far ahead, there are a few courts between cheating and SCOTUS. Some may be resolved before it goes this far. (Wishful thinking.)
OMG. I had forgotten about how Biden treated Thomas during confirmation.
Don’t get mad. Wait 30 years and get even.
A bit more than one precinct...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.