64
Comments (30)
sorted by:
15
itsyaboyDonald 15 points ago +15 / -0

I don’t a speak bullshit. What she be saying

13
errydaktal 13 points ago +13 / -0

If they're allowing this bureaucratic legal fluff and time wasting to get in the way of truth and justice then they've made their intensions clear.

11
young_roshi 11 points ago +13 / -2

I don't speak legalese, but I'd be curious to hear a lawyer pede comment.

11
RC22 11 points ago +11 / -0

I just PM.ed the guy who is stickied (Lawyer dude)

6
young_roshi 6 points ago +6 / -0

you're a gentleman and a scholar

11
Random_Question_Guy 11 points ago +11 / -0

This is the roadmap laid out by Alito and Thomas

2
NoFucks2Give 2 points ago +3 / -1

I think they shot it down in initial release as a trial balloon for the purpose of surveying the signals coming of places like us here at theDonald.win to check if they were lucky enough to find begrudging acceptance among us, by the sampling they took here. They came away horrified to see they are unleashing civil war and so now are saying “look haha....loooooook...guyyys.....we just need it presented to us differently.... haha....I mean come on, that is all we are saying.”

Neh. Tbh I do not believe even that.

11
thefenders53 11 points ago +14 / -3

So they'll add two words and then back to the very same people, who shot down the first one. Is that "The Plan", now?

10
Sum_devil 10 points ago +10 / -0

I need a fucking Valium

2
Skipster777 2 points ago +2 / -0

You can say that again.

2
lixa 2 points ago +2 / -0

I need a fucking valium. There. And a drink. And a hooker. Just kidding about that last part.

6
deleted 6 points ago +8 / -2
2
FreeTheFrog 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is similar to what Rudy said on Newsmax after the scotus news came out

4
The_banned 4 points ago +7 / -3

Am I supposed to give a fuck what they want? We could be in the capitol, building our republic back up to what it should have been from scratch by the time this is worked on. The SCOTUS had their chance and they fucked up. They'll swing with the rest.

3
GurnBlansten 3 points ago +3 / -0

ELI5

1
Deaf_MAGA_Pede 1 point ago +1 / -0

From what I can surmise is that what was presented to the SCOTUS, had some conflicts or some words/statements that didn't make their point across so if they modify their intentions that would make sense enough for SCOTUS to accept, SCOTUS will hear it this time around.

3
theglynn 3 points ago +3 / -0

Oh gee, right. This is stupidly technical.

3
Dereliction 3 points ago +3 / -0

Can we confirm this some other way?

3
Aldoraine007 3 points ago +3 / -0

Need this broken down Barney style.

2
FreeTheFrog 2 points ago +2 / -0

Texas didn’t suffer injury, that’s why they dismissed it. But Trump and the electors who intervened did. So if they file then I believe it can be heard. It would still have to start at district level, because the origination of the case couldn’t be scotus (with Texas it was because it was between two states) and then it would have to move its way back there

3
TrumpWonByAlot 3 points ago +3 / -0

How tf does lady know?

2
dolphinbear 2 points ago +2 / -0

God, please.

2
Widowmaker 2 points ago +2 / -0

Need confirmation on this!!!

2
Alkaizer 2 points ago +2 / -0

If true, then Ken Paxton should be on it

2
MorbidlyOBeast 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is bullshit. No difference between motion to file and motion for leave to file. They mean the same thing.

The difference will be that the plaintiffs coming up through the courts will have standing, and the Supreme Court will be able to reach the merits of the argument, which is strong.

1
RC22 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sounds Good !!

1
rektsauce 1 point ago +1 / -0

What in the?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Thedon202024 1 point ago +1 / -0

Please please please

-2
Suo_Tamaki -2 points ago +1 / -3

That's some solid coping.