The Supreme Court rejects Sidney Powell's election appeals in AZ & WI

[essentialsaltes]

LINK

The Supreme Court on Monday formally rejected two of Sidney Powell's lawsuits seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 US election, brushing away any lingering ideas that Donald Trump would be declared the true winner.

As Law and Crime first reported, the court didn't offer any comment while rejecting the two lawsuits. One lawsuit sought to overturn results in Arizona, the other in Wisconsin.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

How do you continue losing an election that’s been over for nearly 4 months?

 

[iluvatar5150]

How do you continue losing an election that’s been over for nearly 4 months?

Practice.

 

[essentialsaltes]

How do you continue losing an election that’s been over for nearly 4 months?

After you get tired of winning, your only alternative is an unending losing streak.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

After you get tired of winning, your only alternative is an unending losing streak.

The approach seems to be to continue losing until you circle around to the other side of victory.

 

[DaisyDay]

LINK

The Supreme Court on Monday formally rejected two of Sidney Powell's lawsuits seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 US election, brushing away any lingering ideas that Donald Trump would be declared the true winner.

As Law and Crime first reported, the court didn't offer any comment while rejecting the two lawsuits. One lawsuit sought to overturn results in Arizona, the other in Wisconsin.

Don't you know that Donald John will be inaugurated on the real Inauguration Day, March 4th?

 

[Hank77]

Don't you know that Donald John will be inaugurated on the real Inauguration Day, March 4th?

So I've heard.

 

[Desk trauma]

Don't you know that Donald John will be inaugurated on the real Inauguration Day, March 4th?

Any rumblings about what is next after then does not happen? I have seen adherents to the conspiracy that we dare not speak its name hedging much more than usual about the march thing.

 

[cow451]

Any rumblings about what is next after then does not happen? I have seen adherents to the conspiracy that we dare not speak its name hedging much more than usual about the march thing.

Maybe check Marjorie Q Greene’s schedule for March 4th.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Any rumblings about what is next after then does not happen?

Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Daughter of Trump coming in her kingdom.

 

[In-Christ-Alone]

LINK

The Supreme Court on Monday formally rejected two of Sidney Powell's lawsuits seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 US election, brushing away any lingering ideas that Donald Trump would be declared the true winner.

As Law and Crime first reported, the court didn't offer any comment while rejecting the two lawsuits. One lawsuit sought to overturn results in Arizona, the other in Wisconsin.

problem is, that Trump cannot stand the fact that he was BEATEN by sleepy old Joe! I said back in October last year, that the Dems would win the White House, the Upper and Lower Houses, and the popular vote, and they did just that! It would seem to some, that it is still somehow possible for DT to get back into the WH, and remove JB! These are wild dreams...

 

[iluvatar5150]

problem is, that Trump cannot stand the fact that he was BEATEN by sleepy old Joe! I said back in October last year, that the Dems would win the White House, the Upper and Lower Houses, and the popular vote, and they did just that! It would seem to some, that it is still somehow possible for DT to get back into the WH, and remove JB! These are wild dreams...

What's funnier is that a lot of down-ballot Republicans outperformed expectations - it wasn't Republicans that voters rejected; it was him.

 

[JSRG]

Any rumblings about what is next after then does not happen? I have seen adherents to the conspiracy that we dare not speak its name hedging much more than usual about the march thing.

A few days ago on another board I saw a poster mention that someone they knew was convinced that Trump would be reinstated on April 22. (I'm not sure why that particular date was picked, though, as this is secondhand information)

 

[cow451]

A few days ago on another board I saw a poster mention that someone they knew was convinced that Trump would be reinstated on April 22. (I'm not sure why that particular date was picked, though, as this is secondhand information)

4/22/2021 is single letter code for ..... something.

 

[SeventyOne]

LINK

The Supreme Court on Monday formally rejected two of Sidney Powell's lawsuits seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 US election, brushing away any lingering ideas that Donald Trump would be declared the true winner.

As Law and Crime first reported, the court didn't offer any comment while rejecting the two lawsuits. One lawsuit sought to overturn results in Arizona, the other in Wisconsin.

It's reasons like this that half the population will forever consider Biden as illegitimate and a usurper and by extension, all Dems as, well, the least offensive word I can use here is 'dishonest'. That's just the optics of it. Let the evidence be permitted and seen, otherwise, you can all quit claiming he won fairly. You all should be wanting this too, to make it shown to all that everything was legit. But, shocker, transparency seems to be the last thing that is desired.

 

[A2SG]

It's reasons like this that half the population will forever consider Biden as illegitimate and a usurper and by extension, all Dems as, well, the least offensive word I can use here is 'dishonest'. That's just the optics of it. Let the evidence be permitted and seen, otherwise, you can all quit claiming he won fairly. You all should be wanting this too, to make it shown to all that everything was legit. But, shocker, transparency seems to be the last thing that is desired.

Since the case has been denied, there's nothing to prevent Sydney Powell from making public whatever evidence she provided the courts. Why not ask her what she had?

-- A2SG, go right to the source.....

 

[trunks2k]

Since the case has been denied, there's nothing to prevent Sydney Powell from making public whatever evidence she provided the courts. Why not ask her what she had?

-- A2SG, go right to the source.....

Even before the case was denied, she could show whatever evidence she has. What she has shown and presented to the courts has been laughably bad. Well, either laughable or just concerning for the condition of her mental state. There's stuff that she has filed that borders on sanctionable, and indeed at least on district is pursuing sanctions against her (or is it Linn they are going after? I forget which one).

The idea that the courts should just let these cases go through just because is ludicrous. That's not how courts work or what they are for.

 

[trunks2k]

It's reasons like this that half the population will forever consider Biden as illegitimate and a usurper and by extension, all Dems as, well, the least offensive word I can use here is 'dishonest'. That's just the optics of it. Let the evidence be permitted and seen, otherwise, you can all quit claiming he won fairly. You all should be wanting this too, to make it shown to all that everything was legit. But, shocker, transparency seems to be the last thing that is desired.

Bull hockey. Courts are not there to argue because of "optics". This election has been incredibly transparent. There have been multiple recounts, etc. There is zero evidence to suggest anything was illegitimate. If Powell et, al have some some sort of magical evidence that show there's reason to think otherwise then they are free to present it. Thus far everything they have presented and filed have been utter duds. And that's ignoring their complete incompetence in regards to basic legal procedure.

 

[KCfromNC]

It's reasons like this that half the population will forever consider Biden as illegitimate

I strongly doubt half the population is bad enough at logic to think that "Donald's team losing again in court" -> "The candidate who beat him is illegitimate".

 

[trunks2k]

I strongly doubt half the population is bad enough at logic to think that "Donald's team losing again in court" -> "The candidate who beat him is illegitimate".

Half? no. But a very sizeable percentage have decided there was (significant) election fraud. No amount of evidence will convince them otherwise. That's also part of why the idea of "just let the case proceed so people can see the truth" is so ludicrous. The case could result in a video recording of Trump, Powell, et al discussing that Trump clearly lost the election legitimately and they need to come up with some stupid theory as to why the election was stolen and that there'd be no way they would win but they'd raise a lot of money; and people would still think the election was stolen.