Said that the SC’s main function is to preserve the Republic, not follow the law if it would threaten the integrity of the Republic’s cohesion, and so the 4 SC conservative judges will agree to decide to rule against Trump and that way us conservatives will be very disappointed, but seeing the majority or near majority ruling, we will say “okay well we don’t like the ruling but there was unanimous agreement in the SC so we are good Americans and we will accept it.”

Somehow Scott did not also produce this twin argument:

SC’s main interest being the preservation of the Republic, the left leaning judges will decide to rule for Trump and that way Liberals will be very disappointed, but seeing majority or near majority ruling from their side on the court, the Left will say “okay well we don’t like the ruling but there was unanimous agreement in the SC so we are good Americans and we will accept it.”

That is LOGICALLY ON PAR from the other side of the coin with his prediction, without any added caveats needed, but YET he somehow puts the onus on the conservative judges to “do the right thing”.

God damn what an asshat. As if a unanimous SC ruling that makes voter fraud the winner would not fundamentally break the social contract and destroy the integrity of the Republic at its very core principle.

Scotty.....always trying to find a way to run away from a fight. I also notice how scared he is of a civil war.....by always absolutely denying ANY possibility. Saying “impossible because no one wants one”. LOLOLOLOLOL as if that is how civil wars are prevented.... like....history Scotty, wtf??