202 I have trouble accepting the court’s reasoning here in the dismissal of @realDonaldTrump . Poll watchers were denied the ability to watch (assumed true), but other poll watchers may have been too so not treated “differently”? It seem that would taint the entire process even more… (media.patriots.win) posted 152 days ago by fishyPussy 152 days ago by fishyPussy +202 / -0 7 comments share 7 comments share save hide report block hide child comments Comments (7) sorted by: top new old worst ▲ 12 ▼ – Vla1ne 12 points 152 days ago +12 / -0 "Nobody was able to verify the votes, not just your side, so it's all ok now." If the judge really doesn't understand why that isn't the pinnacle of retardation, they have no business being on any bench ever. permalink save report block reply ▲ 6 ▼ – handpeople 6 points 152 days ago +6 / -0 This is the same court who railroaded the whole election extension BS in the first place. They already showed their intent. permalink save report block reply ▲ 6 ▼ – BrewSwillis 6 points 152 days ago +6 / -0 Maybe the lawsuit was partly to get them to admit that they didn't let either side watch the ballot counting properly? "The Republicans weren't treated differently, because we didn't let the democrats watch the count either"! BOOM, election invalid! permalink save report block reply ▲ 5 ▼ – deleted 5 points 152 days ago +5 / -0 ▲ 4 ▼ – Ridiculousbullschitt 4 points 152 days ago +4 / -0 It’s called judicial spineless-ness. Easily curable by hanging. permalink save report block reply ▲ 4 ▼ – TwoPlusTwoEqualsFour 4 points 152 days ago +4 / -0 "There's no evidence that we didn't violate the law for every poll watcher so it didn't happen." My brain hurts. permalink save report block reply ▲ 2 ▼ – Itateeverybody 2 points 152 days ago +2 / -0 SOOOO.... If I got this straight, this is an appeal, to have the case heard. Not even on the case. So if we win at SCOTUS we got back to the bottom (district) to actually hold the case? Is that accurate? permalink save report block reply
"Nobody was able to verify the votes, not just your side, so it's all ok now."
If the judge really doesn't understand why that isn't the pinnacle of retardation, they have no business being on any bench ever.
This is the same court who railroaded the whole election extension BS in the first place. They already showed their intent.
Maybe the lawsuit was partly to get them to admit that they didn't let either side watch the ballot counting properly?
"The Republicans weren't treated differently, because we didn't let the democrats watch the count either"!
BOOM, election invalid!
It’s called judicial spineless-ness. Easily curable by hanging.
"There's no evidence that we didn't violate the law for every poll watcher so it didn't happen."
My brain hurts.
SOOOO....
If I got this straight, this is an appeal, to have the case heard. Not even on the case. So if we win at SCOTUS we got back to the bottom (district) to actually hold the case?
Is that accurate?