I say let the democrats pack the court. It will show democrats are not redeemable and only demand complete power.
JoMa
Anyone who uses the term “overturn the election” is irrelevant.
And it was only the standing part of the case, if I understand correctly, that got rejected by the 7-2 margin.
They blinked because they didn’t want their houses burned down and the physical harm that would have come to them, their families and their pets.
They blinked because they know the left would have no qualms in doing the above.
That’s why they blinked.
So much for kavenaugh, Gorsuch and the vaunted Amy Coney Barrett.
Well, this is stupid.
The threat of pack would make the court rule in FAVOR of Trump, not Biden.
Except if the election was overturned, the Dem's wouldn't have power to pack a lunch pail.
With all the talk of an invasion by china through our corporate and political system may prompt the president to use his executive powers to solve this problem once and for all.
Given the history of Dem-rat behaviour, I’m not sure that Morris’s point should be dismissed that easily. I can easily see that the SCOTUS was thinking about the possibility that if they took the case, they’d be barely able to hear themselves think over the rabid chants of Burn/Loot/Murder, Antifa and Demcommunists packed in tight and ringed around the courthouse and a mile deep...
Karen KowalskiWell listen to this I just read. It is like a chess game. Read carefully. IT IS LONG, BUT READ ON! By George Wetherby JrGlenn WhiteheadSo the SCOTUS said no. They won’t hear the case. Cue crazy leftists and their inane celebrations. You’re probably pissed off by now because you thought the SCOTUS was going to take this case.Some of you on here can vouch for this, but I’ve stated a few times that the SCOTUS may throw this case out and that, if they did, Trump never needed them to begin with. This is an easy one to explain.When it comes to elections there is no HIGHER or FINAL authority than the state legislatures. No, not even the Supreme Court has the final say in this, believe it or not. In all of this where is Trump? He’s quiet. Where is Sidney Powell? Lin Wood? Rudy? Jenna?An hour has passed and no one said anything on twitter about it. What if I told you Trump knew this case would get thrown out? He had to know this and I’ll tell you why. One of Trump’s lawyers is Mark Levin’s wife. The Levin’s are leading authorities on constitutional law.Why is this important? Because the Texas filing was weak. Their argument was REALLY weak, so weak that both of the Levin’s would have told Trump days ago that this case wasn’t going to get heard. In fact...Mark Levin DID say it wasn’t going to get heard on his radio show...all week long and he was right.Justice Alito was right in his decision. He argued that the state of Texas wasn’t, in so many words, as serious about a resolution as they pretended to be. He said there weren’t “interested” in real resolution...and he was right.He stated that just as in Arizona vs California 589 U.S. where they disputed over the distribution over the water from the colorado river, the actions of what state cannot disenfranchise the actions of another.In other words Texas can’t say they were wronged because they voted for Trump and PA voted for Biden, even if the laws were illegal. One state cannot dictate the actions of another state otherwise we would have precedence for no individuality of states.They would all dispute over matters until EVERY state had the same laws...therefore simulating a federal regulation where it becomes national. The SCOTUS cannot set that precedence. What would be next? California suing Nevada for having more favorable tax breaks, drawing California businesses to register there instead of California, disenfranchising the other taxpayers and programs in California that need the tax dollars (for example)?Do you have any idea how bad it would be to make that precedence? When there is no competition there is tyranny.Moving right along...The state of Texas produced a weak argument. Trump knew this but he still pushed it. Why? Legal strategy. Here’s what I mean...In the legal process, the accuser has the greatest amount of pressure in the case. The accused is innocent by default so all of the pressure of proving their side rides on the accuser. At the same time, if the Judge throws the accuser’s case out with prejudice, the accuser can’t bring that complaint up again.What I’m saying is the GREATEST risk to a case is to become the prosecutor. As a matter of fact, it’s easier to DEFEND yourself than it is to PROVE that the person you accused is guilty. Stay with me. It’s long but I’m going somewhere...So whoever brings the case first runs the highest risk of losing before they even have a chance to fight. Why is that important? Because Trump stands a better chance of winning this as a defendant than he does as an accuser.Now comes the good part...I’ve said this a thousand times and I’ll say it again. Trump doesn’t need the courts to win! He only needs for the state legislatures to do their jobs! And...if he gets a SCOTUS hearing that’s just icing on the cake. Now let me tell you what is about to happen.I thought for a while that one of two things would happen. 1, SCOTUS would hear this first cast. 2, SCOTUS would NOT hear the first case but they may or may not hear the second case. We’re having this chat so option 1 didn’t happen.So here’s what’s going to happen. The state legislatures will be pissed. They will feel as if THEY have been disenfranchised, and either on Monday or January 6th (when Congress count the votes) the state legislatures will CHANGE their certifications to Trump, those 4 states (maybe even AZ and NV too).This will cause an internal legal battle within the states. By article 2 second 2 of the constitution, the state legislatures have the final say on who they want to certify as the winner of their states. Well this will piss off the Governors who all have illegally certified the states and illegally passed state laws that strip the state legislatures of their article 2 second 2 powers.The states will say “we have the right, we’re not backing down” and the Governor’s AG will say “see you in court.” Now comes that second scenario I talked about. The SCOTUS is in a pickle. They don’t have the authority to tell the state legislatures to ignore the constitution and follow federal law. Federal law is automatically overridden by the constitution. So they can do one of two things.Take the case and no matter what they ruled, the state legislatures can ignore it since they have constitutional rights. Or the SCOTUS can do what I THINK they’re going to do....throw the case out.Now you can’t say the SCOTUS was politicized since they threw out both cases. But in throwing OUT the case, they legitimize the state legislature’s decisions. Trump wins.But what if they take the case? Ok. Remember when I said that it’s harder to win as an accuser than it is as a defendant? Well the AG of PA (for example) will have to explain why and how any federal law can override the constitution.I’m betting 5 of those Justices will disagree with that and they can LITERALLY cite the constitution as precedence and final authority. Trump wins. I believe that the SCOTUS will keep out of this for sake of not showing partiality.But if they DO get involved, it will be after January 6th where a constitutional crisis will exist and then they would need to step in and settle the matter in 3 possible ways.1, Ignore the complaints, Trump wins...2, Take the case, invalidate the elections, give it to the states to vote...Trump wins as we have a state majority of 26 or...3, Take the case, order a nationwide audit and recertification. With all the fraud.....Trump wins.In the end, Trump will win. You can roll these dice as many times as you want. The Constitution will win this election for Trump.
So the Dems threaten SCOTUS with court packing, and the way to stop it is to give the election to the Dems? So the Dems will keep their promise now?
Wouldn’t it have worked the opposite? With Pence as the tie breaker it would have assured Democrats wouldn’t be able to pack the court. Now they will pack the court if the two Democrats win in the special election, which they will because they cheat.
You can’t negotiate with terrorists. IF this is true (I have no reason to doubt it ), we are up against worse terrorism than 9/11.
Either we deal with it or enjoy your chains.
No. Trump picked two Bush loyalists swamp creatures who do what they are told. Barrett was a phony during her whole confirmation. I never trusted her and I was right. She exposed herself kneeling at the altar of Saint George of Kirby. Now they can’t wait to take out the second amendment. The first is already gone thanks to this court.
How does this even make sense?
“If you make us LOSE, we’ll pack the court...”.
Wait... won’t they have nearly ZERO power and ability to do that if the court overturned the media-called election results?
Why would Thomas care? He’s retiring soon anyway.
Why would the rest of them care either? They’re secure for as long as they wish.
Silly scenario, Dick.
Apparently they didn’t scare them too badly. They wouldn’t even hear the Texas case. Now they will be free to pack it if Georgia is lost.
With the recent SCOTUS ruling, it appears the court is already packed.
the Supreme Court was sent a message by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and the Democrat Party during the election.
“And the message was: ‘If you overturn this election, we will pack you, and make your Court basically meaningless.”
This election has Not been rigged.
DNC
I think they didn’t need to use ‘packing’.
Look what happened to Tony Bolinski and the other whistleblowers. These guys accepted the SCOTUS seats to have a good life, not have themselves and their extended families under threat. Heck, only a few in the country can stand the heat. Look at Spicer, etc.