Objectively, you are incorrect. Also, I would no more read National Review than I would watch FoxNews. No, I do respect the analysis of R&R Legal and Jay Sekullo. It's also interesting that the Trump lawyers never attempted to roll their cases into the TX cases.
Also, did you not notice the RINO scum who joined in to endorse the TX case? Shouldn't that have been a red flag to you?
I have no interest in exchanging friendly fire. We both want the same outcome. I just think it's absurd to make assumptions about any of the justices from this one case.
That case was perfect.
You can take your National Review talking points and put them where the sun don't shine.
Objectively, you are incorrect. Also, I would no more read National Review than I would watch FoxNews. No, I do respect the analysis of R&R Legal and Jay Sekullo. It's also interesting that the Trump lawyers never attempted to roll their cases into the TX cases.
Also, did you not notice the RINO scum who joined in to endorse the TX case? Shouldn't that have been a red flag to you?
I have no interest in exchanging friendly fire. We both want the same outcome. I just think it's absurd to make assumptions about any of the justices from this one case.