Comments (25)
sorted by:
5
Leadforpeds 5 points ago +5 / -0

Please stop spreading misinformation. The case wasn't thrown out, the emergency injunction relief was denied, meaning SCOTUS won't halt certification yet.

5
deleted 5 points ago +6 / -1
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
Warchant59 5 points ago +5 / -0

Texas

5
dataonly 5 points ago +6 / -1

See Jenna Ellis tweet.

4
Mrsattorney 4 points ago +4 / -0

Please stop posting false doomer information here. The SC simply declined to grant injuctive relief to Mike Kelly and Sean Parnell.

4
Frumplmeist311 4 points ago +5 / -1

Why would you say that? The Texas case with the other States has more meat in it. You can’t dump multiple cases on the SCOTUS and expect them to hear arguments. If they dismiss the Texas one I will agree with you.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Judy2020 3 points ago +4 / -1

No, Please look at all the past posts about this! It is not bad news!

3
lrmacdaniels 3 points ago +3 / -0

Not true

3
MagaGal 3 points ago +3 / -0

Perhaps you should delete this post because, as you can see from all the comments, your post is inaccurate.

1
XygyX [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wow, if I didn't know better I'd swear I was on Twatter, considering all of the unhinged venom I'm getting for expressing my opinion. What SCOTUS did by swatting down the emergency injunction was nothing more than a cowardly hecklers veto.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
Throwaway_Test 2 points ago +2 / -0

The epoch times is not exactly a leftist site. Even in their reporting, they point out that there is no dissenting view and nothing is provided about certiorari. This comment will get seriously downvoted, but if injunctive relief is not granted then what are the implications? Time is of the essence, and an injunction would be entirely appropriate. If that is not provided, it means that the court is hesitant to get involved. The Pennsylvania case is not likely to be accepted. In like manner, the Texas case, which has much in common with the above, will, I fear, likely not get a favorable ruling. This analysis is quite similar to what Mark Levin has said on his radio show in the past hour. I hate to say it, but it is quite believable. It is a disservice to the users of this site that this perspective is not getting a lot of attention here. Instead, we have a number of thin reeds that get all the upvotes.

1
XygyX [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not going to overdose on hope while going cold turkey on reality. Ultimately, none of us know how this will play out in the courts, but we need to entertain ALL outcomes.

2
jweeks221 2 points ago +3 / -1

quiet doomer

1
non-entity 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yep. Move on to the next box or watch your kids become slaves

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
Billygoat65 1 point ago +1 / -0

Shit post.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
XygyX [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

No doom, just an observation based on previous behavior. Hope for the best but expect the worst. To not be thinking about what comes after this potential outcome is insane.

1
XygyX [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Seems like" is not the same as "definitely will". Stop getting your undies in a knot everyone.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +3 / -8
4
Tx50bmg 4 points ago +4 / -0

Brand new account that just posts this. Deported.