Sorry guys... but this is a junk petition masquerading as a piece of legal proficiency. Its so bad, that I question how the hype continues to rage unabated.
So at first I wanted to believe this case could work. I still believe it should on principle. However, Derek Johnson said that it would fail and he gave solid reasons why the SCOTUS can’t act. Everyone has an opinion about who’s a paytriot and who’s legit but it really comes down to what can you prove to yourself.
His timeline and documents make sense to me. I think we are in a silent war.
The silent war to end all wars. 🙏
If you read the rehearing petition all you need to read is that is doesn't meet the criteria for re-hearing which is...intervening circumstances of substantial or controlling effect... rule 44.2.
So all you need to ask yourself is has there been any substantial change of circumstances since the denial to hear on Jan 9 and this request dated Jan 18?
If the answer is no, then you already know how the Supremes will rule on this.
Sorry guys... but this is a junk petition masquerading as a piece of legal proficiency. Its so bad, that I question how the hype continues to rage unabated.
So at first I wanted to believe this case could work. I still believe it should on principle. However, Derek Johnson said that it would fail and he gave solid reasons why the SCOTUS can’t act. Everyone has an opinion about who’s a paytriot and who’s legit but it really comes down to what can you prove to yourself.
His timeline and documents make sense to me. I think we are in a silent war. The silent war to end all wars. 🙏
If you read the rehearing petition all you need to read is that is doesn't meet the criteria for re-hearing which is...intervening circumstances of substantial or controlling effect... rule 44.2. So all you need to ask yourself is has there been any substantial change of circumstances since the denial to hear on Jan 9 and this request dated Jan 18? If the answer is no, then you already know how the Supremes will rule on this.