The filing (writ) has to state WHY (based in legal fact) the lower courts erred. It does not do that. This is an individual representing himself. There is no basis in fact for the SCOTUS to accept this.
The fact this is on TicTock makes it more hilarious to me as a paralegal, but seriously, this is the result of civics courses being eliminated from the curriculum. Nobody knows how their govt works!
President Trump did not (as this video says) announce which year he was going to campaign for president, that much is right. BUT (!) the stage had several "TRUMP 2024" posters on it, so that aspect might be invalid.
True, and I know the significance of the 19 flags. I was merely pointing out that there were "TRUMP 2024" signs at the speech. Maybe that was a misdirection, I don't know. But I never have thought Trump would run in the 2024 campaign, that America simply cannot afford 2 more years of idiots in charge, and that through some legal and Constitutional method, Trump would be back in office sooner than that.
I love hopium early in the morning! Ogden, UT representing all patriots here!
Pleasant Grove, here!
This idiot commenting on law is laughable. This is not going to be taken, it does NOT meet the threshold.
What is the threshold? I'm not a courtfag and I want to understand what you mean.
The filing (writ) has to state WHY (based in legal fact) the lower courts erred. It does not do that. This is an individual representing himself. There is no basis in fact for the SCOTUS to accept this.
What was your first clue? TicTock?
The fact this is on TicTock makes it more hilarious to me as a paralegal, but seriously, this is the result of civics courses being eliminated from the curriculum. Nobody knows how their govt works!
Realistically, even if SCOTUS took this case seriously, it is far too serious for a snap judgement.
Does not rise to the level of hopium.
Hey, I've searched the SCOTUS site and nothing is coming up for 22-4007. What am I doing wrong lol
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/DocketFiles/html/Public/22-380.html
trying to get the link here -- https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-380/243739/20221027152243533_20221027-152110-95757954-00007015.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2E4sDP_Spe05NdweuAyixK3CVrTl9n9QwPAfnOWHDoiNdTm_eJW0SV_DU
Much appreciated.
President Trump did not (as this video says) announce which year he was going to campaign for president, that much is right. BUT (!) the stage had several "TRUMP 2024" posters on it, so that aspect might be invalid.
There were approximately 50 comms in that speech. 19 flags on the stage for starters.
True, and I know the significance of the 19 flags. I was merely pointing out that there were "TRUMP 2024" signs at the speech. Maybe that was a misdirection, I don't know. But I never have thought Trump would run in the 2024 campaign, that America simply cannot afford 2 more years of idiots in charge, and that through some legal and Constitutional method, Trump would be back in office sooner than that.
I think it (the 2024 thing) was just for fun -- kek
Likely.
Not for fun, but it drew the deep state response(s). Missile landed in Poland and almost started WW III, Obama and Bush were queued up for speeches.