250
Comments (73)
sorted by:
70
GA-Peach-Patriot 70 points ago +71 / -1

I want to believe, I really do. But, what is this source? Why should it be believed or deemed reliable? Not picking at you, OP...just wondering aloud.

37
b472113 [S] 37 points ago +38 / -1

No source, obviously hopium +++.

As noted, just an idea.

18
CQVFEFE 18 points ago +19 / -1

Nopium ;)

4
Murphy71 4 points ago +9 / -5

More like copium.

2
jcab93 2 points ago +2 / -0

Guess I'll just continue to mopium 😞

3
ChronicMetamorphosis 3 points ago +3 / -0

We were expecting dank nugs, but all we got is schwag.

2
Fren_Downunder 2 points ago +3 / -1

Shittium

20
crashdaddy 20 points ago +20 / -0

According to Forbes, they threw out the last case about a year ago. That's not to say there can't be new ones, but I haven't found any.

10
merf 10 points ago +10 / -0

Yeah it feels like there would have to be a case.

Are there any historical examples of the court taking a case in secret?

18
merf 18 points ago +18 / -0

Well shit, guess that would have been worth a search before a post. 😅

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/22/supreme-court-will-let-possible-mueller-company-file-papers-in-secret.html

13
Red_Pill_Pusher_Man 13 points ago +13 / -0

Interdasting! I wonder whatever happened to the case that Mike Lindell was trying to get before the SCOTUS?

10
InmatesRunTheAsylum 10 points ago +10 / -0

I was just going to ask about this. Glad that I kept reading.

11
crashdaddy 11 points ago +11 / -0

According to this thing, they've done so recently. Interesting.

9
S11houette 9 points ago +9 / -0

Absolutely. And you aren't going to hear about them....

There is a requirement in the constitution that all people have to right to a public trial. They can wave that right if they choose.

But other cases have no requirement of being public. In fact, the court might find that keeping the details of a case secret may be necessary for the case to get a fair hearing or to protect national secrets.

Election fraud would likely fall under both categories. The sources and methods used to catch foreign governments in the act are likely sensitive.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
6
Perrin 6 points ago +6 / -0

I disagree. Who would be getting sued? You don't have to know who did the thing for the thing to be true and provable. Seems they would have the power to address the issue outside of litigation. My 2 cents. For instance no one sued to overturn roe they just decided to end it. As far as I can tell anyway.

3
S11houette 3 points ago +3 / -0

My popcorn has been hot for years.

5
Cuttinmuffins 5 points ago +5 / -0

Mine's stale and now it's to expensive to buy more.

1
crazycloud2 1 point ago +1 / -0

I planted some, along with my regular corn this year.

5
Pandas4trump2020 5 points ago +5 / -0

It would be on their docket. It's not therefore this is fake and ghey.

Its almost like i remember someone saying "Military is the only way"...

7
queue-anon 7 points ago +7 / -0

I can’t stand when people post things like this and they talk as if they are fact. Then they have the audacity to put that sly emoji as if they are so clever. I mostly see this type of garbage on telegram channels by people who want to famefag

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
4
Iknowstuff 4 points ago +4 / -0

Agreed

2
DarQ2light 2 points ago +2 / -0

Plausible as f***

14
BirchTBarlow 14 points ago +14 / -0

I'll believe it when I see it.

12
deleted 12 points ago +13 / -1
10
2ndenthusiast 10 points ago +10 / -0

Would be fuckin cool. u/#q2283 u/#q1155

9
BetterNameUnfound 9 points ago +9 / -0

It's not "The only way is the Supreme Court."

8
DragonBallz 8 points ago +8 / -0

Dang! If this is true, cue the space alien invasion distraction...

9
WeAreThePlan 9 points ago +9 / -0

I've been waiting for that. I vote for the space aliens to be striped green and pink.

8
Perrin 8 points ago +8 / -0

Is attractive too much to ask too? I would rather not vomit when looking at them

7
WeAreThePlan 7 points ago +7 / -0

That sounds like someone who has seen too many photos of Cankles lately in the news.

2
Snowgirl1965 2 points ago +3 / -1

But polka dots are so much more flattering.

2
WeAreThePlan 2 points ago +2 / -0

True. I could go for polka dots. Deep State, are you listening? We could go for polka dotted fake space aliens.

1
Snowgirl1965 1 point ago +2 / -1

😆😆😆

5
ATLAS_ONE 5 points ago +5 / -0

If this happens I will eat my head.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
5
GreenLivesMatter 5 points ago +5 / -0

Would be Ultra RAD

4
MICHIGANisRED 4 points ago +4 / -0

All that's missing is an exact datefag

5
bpsays 5 points ago +5 / -0

It is also missing that Trump will send out the emergency broadcast and tweet about the storm before SCOTUS announces. cue epic movie outro music

4
Patriot11Retiree 4 points ago +4 / -0

Saw this same message in a Bitchute comment section. The message was supposedly sent through an AOL mail account. Do you know the source for this message? Someone could be playing around with false messaging.

4
JeremyBearimy 4 points ago +4 / -0

No source... Just words. This just agitates people. Q didn't say this. No facts to support. Just words.

"Within the next several weeks..."

Bull Shit

4
HoppyHap 4 points ago +4 / -0

The court has been running shadow docket cases that receive very limited briefings and are rarely, if ever, argued before the justices for quite sometime. However, I do think because of the riots that would occur the change over would never be public. I would think a shadow government plan would be implemented.

Nothing surprises me any longer and beer is good and people are crazy.

3
IceK1ng 3 points ago +3 / -0

Where is it reported they have mil protection?

1
Perrin 1 point ago +1 / -0

Gov Youngkin declared their protection order but I thought that was police not mil

2
chicagotrauma 2 points ago +2 / -0

From that keyboard to God's eyes

2
Sunnywindows 2 points ago +2 / -0

Maybe not true but I sure enjoyed reading it.

2
boataholic 2 points ago +2 / -0

That would mean "the Supreme Court is the only way". So nope.

2
VoatAnon1984 2 points ago +2 / -0

Datttttttttttteeeeeeeeeee FAGGINGGGGG!

2
Sadness 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not quite. It is secret agenda fagging.

2
spaceforceltc 2 points ago +2 / -0

The only reason I can see this happening is so that they can give Trump a 2 year term and make him inelligible to run again in 2024. And he will be too busy in these two years cleaning up Brandon's mess that he won't be able to do anything else.

1
Sadness 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I agree. Those dynamics will change on Jan 20, 2023. But that is after the data collection period is shut down, i.e. September 2022, when the statutory 22 months of preserving election data is over. This happens two months before the midterms. So t get the full juicy sauce, investigators will keep that window open as long as possible.

We have it all, but would you not like to go for max bust?

So, on that basis, I imagine we will first see a red wave come midterms. Then more info drops, and then a major event early in 2023.

Now I'm date fagging.

See what you made me do.

2
SgtPepper29 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would have turned this movie off years ago...

2
rherrell 2 points ago +2 / -0

Elections are run by the states, until a state presents a case to the SC they can't do a damn thing.

2
AngelTrumpet 2 points ago +2 / -0

The Left SCJ would leak it rather than have the left sent to oblivion

5
Perrin 5 points ago +5 / -0

Unless it was under seal. And under penalty of death.

1
AngelTrumpet 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is there a precedent where the SCOTUS was held under the penalty of death? I'd love to be wrong and this to play out. Getting weary and wanting a normal world RSN.

2
bobobob 2 points ago +2 / -0

What case are they reviewing to even put this in the realm of possibility?

2
Katrina241 2 points ago +2 / -0

They'll wait until the schools are out for summer. Can't have the Liberal Insane blowing up any more kids.

2
anotherdream 2 points ago +2 / -0

I've been thinking something along these lines. - If this is true. We should all be rejoicing now.

1
NooneFor2024II 1 point ago +2 / -1

Oh, so they are worthy of protection but we are not. Got it.

"Rules for we, not for thee"

1
Rooks 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ok, so we should go back and watch the Thomas and Robert's statements about the leak and see if it is vague enough to allow this. I very much doubt they would lie on record about the case upon which they are working.... more likely they would leave it vague, but that is not what I remember them saying.

1
Petiteputnam1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lmaooo I'll have what you're smoking

1
nadav3rse 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’ll bite just for the entertainment value

1
BoomerNuc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah, we will see. I for one do not think this is the case but would be happy to be wrong

1
JakeCAnon 1 point ago +1 / -0

Complete BS

1
DavoutNey 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is no case currently on the docket that would purport to do anything close to this.

Bullshit.

1
American_Nostalgic 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is stretch considering the Supreme Court rejected every case put in front of them, so what are they ruling on? Which cases did the Supreme Court docket???

1
polish_snausage 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Under the guise of riot control" comes to mind 🙏

1
MisprisionIsEvil 1 point ago +1 / -0

If devolution is true, it's possible the court is being told what to do. We simply don't know what's actually happening.

We're at the mercy of liars. Even the good guys are liars. They just don't call it that.

1
Striker1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ooohhhh, such a great guess! Something is going to happen— so why not that!

1
R3tro 1 point ago +1 / -0

2…… moar…….weeeeeeeeeeeeeekkkkkkssssssss