BREAKING: Supreme Court rejects effort to remove Trump from the ballot
(twitter.com)
🏆 - WINNING - 🏆
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (82)
sorted by:
Get wrecked, TDS cultists.
The fact it was 9-0 means a LOT. It can't be stated how big of a deal this is for the country. This is the Supreme Court, with one voice, telling these communist fools to sit their asses down.
Now, the question must be asked. If Joe Biden actually got 81 million votes because Donald Trump is so unpopular, why do they want him off the ballot so badly?
Guaranteed that Action Jackson didn't want to be stuck writing a minority opinion for an 8-1 decision
Lawd have marcy, that would've been a fun read.
Did you listen to any of the questioning? Jackson surprised me. She actually engaged in a harder line of questioning than most of the others that pointed out how unconstitutional it would be for individual states to decide elections.
I mean, every single justice there knew they would be relinquishing power of the federal government which meant it would be difficult for them to install anyone they wanted down the line, for either side.
Turns out, when the guy they cheated against had like 98% of the counties won, that was not a game they wanted to play. Not really.
Right 9-0, and still the leftist shills will argue all day that the conservative lead court is in the pocket of Trump.
"Are". Are arguing all day that the court is corrupt and this proves it.
SCOTUS didn't address the fact that he was adjudicated an insurrectionist though. His defense specifically wanted him cleared of it. So I wouldn't call it a full victory.
Wasn't really the point of it, he was never actually convicted of any of that -- because he plainly didn't do it -- and so it would actually lend more legitimacy to those claims if they did.
Seems evident on its face since he has never been indicted for being an insurrectionist, much less tried and convicted.
If I remember correctly, some of the questioning did hit on the lines of "How can it be legitimate for a state to remove someone for a crime they were never charged with.
I wonder how that lunatic leftist Ecstasy is spinning this.
I suppose it makes the question moot as far as the question posed to SCOTUS on this occasion - Do the states have the authority to remove Donald (under any circumstances) = no.
I suppose that part of the defense could have just been for show.
That being said, the SCOTUS opinion did delve into how the 14th amendment could be used, which is what caused concurrences by ACB and the liberal judges who felt it was out of scope.
Thanks for the additional context, I haven't had time to read the ruling for myself yet.
Now THAT really made me smile. Straight and to the point!