4916
Comments (110)
sorted by:
106
deleted 106 points ago +106 / -0
75
Wtf_socialismreally 75 points ago +75 / -0

He didn't make the move with us, sadly.

He was posting to the end on The Donald

48
deleted 48 points ago +48 / -0
48
FuckReddit4545 48 points ago +48 / -0

There's no way he doesn't have an account. Come on out Fitton! We miss you shitposting with us!

41
Tejanopede 41 points ago +43 / -2

He’s actually been treated like shit here when he has posted. Called a homo, a fake, people say that he’s an attention whore.

Fitton brings a lot to the table, but I can imagine it would be difficult to stay around a place as hostile as this. It’s too bad, honestly.

24
Isthisusedtoo 24 points ago +24 / -0

As a former 4 and 8 Chan poster, I can assure you that this place is not hostile in the least bit.

4
Joesf23 4 points ago +4 / -0

Haha! Yes, if you are new to 4chan, voat, 8chan you are welcomed by being called every name in the book, then being told to kill yourself. It is just the way it is there.

21
Cheesecakecrush 21 points ago +21 / -0

If he could handle it before he could handle it now. Anyone who's been on the internet for a significant amount of time knows it can be a toxic shithole.

7
LatitudeofMind 7 points ago +7 / -0

I don’t remember much of that treatment tbh I remember tommy guns being revered

5
Elvathelion 5 points ago +5 / -0

I don't recall a lot of that - Fitton was treated like a rockstar - he ceratinly didn't get anymore shill treatment than he does on Twatter.

2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
19
Wtf_socialismreally 19 points ago +19 / -0

I miss seeing his guns in his selfies

5
deleted 5 points ago +9 / -4
7
Wtf_socialismreally 7 points ago +7 / -0

And this is why I think the world would just be a better place without them.

2
Marshall2 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are cuck propagandists. DC has no reporters or journalists. They start every story with the conclusion that advances the CCP narrative.

1
Veracious_deplorable 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sooooo basically someone needs to take the fight to the Mayor’s door & family? Quit fighting in the streets with Cucks. Head to the traitor’s den.

1
D0NNIE_DARK0 1 point ago +2 / -1

Why do you keep spamming threads with this?

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
9
CubanitoLopez 9 points ago +9 / -0

Was this on reddit?

12
deleted 12 points ago +12 / -0
6
CubanitoLopez 6 points ago +6 / -0

That's rad

1
Tantalus4200 1 point ago +2 / -1

The "faggot" posts and comment def arnt helping

Though it's been going down as of late

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
55
deleted 55 points ago +55 / -0
10
deleted 10 points ago +22 / -12
31
Thiswillbeintheexam 31 points ago +33 / -2

Sorry, but my understanding is that SCOTUS can't hear new evidence unless it is a state vs state case.

Which means that so long as the Four (PA, WI, AZ, MI) continue to knock Trump's cases out for technicalities, no evidence will EVER be heard and the cases go nowhere.

The Texas case was essentially a workaround in order to be able to produce evidence for the first time in SCOTUS, but they closed the door on that. The gutless fucks dodged.

It's only 38 days to Biden Inauguration and once that happens it's all over. This is going to be ugly, but SOMETHING must be done to save the Republic before that happens.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
8
Marshall2 8 points ago +9 / -1

It's called appellate jurisdiction. It only reviews the lower courts which are charged with hearing the evidence. STATE v. STATE is one of the limited types of cases SCOTUS has original jurisdiction in and is therefore presented EVIDENCE.

THEY PUNTED.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
4
Kraznaya 4 points ago +4 / -0

That's not an accurate understanding. This is generally true of appellate courts, but as we all know SCOTUS is it's own beast. They're not bound by the usual laws and policies governing legal procedure.

When they accept a case, they can consider anything and everything they want. You can introduce new evidence to your hearts content... if the nazgul allow it. You can cite anything they'll let you.

1
Squeaker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sp they CAN hear new evidence...but will they? They've lost my faith.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
15
DanIsSwell 15 points ago +15 / -0 (edited)

I know what they were trying to say, but it doesn’t hold water. We were all injured, just as much as Trump. All of our votes are going towards the same goal: electing a president. The outcome effects every part of our lives. If others cheat, and change the whole end result, then they cheated everyone else out of the rightful outcome. If each state got to vote for a different president, and each state would end up with different presidents (as if each state were its own country) then that is the only situation in which other states would not be injured by their cheating. It’s like players on a sports team using drugs and steroids, to knock the ball out of the park, and run faster than the other team. Then on top of that, the scorekeeper just randomly gives them unearned points. They didn’t only cheat the pitcher, they cheated everyone on the field, and all other teams who suddenly have no chance at play offs. If they changed the whole outcome of the future, for everyone in America, how is that not everyone’s injury?

-3
ALargeRock -3 points ago +2 / -5

Until the election is certified and sent to congress, technically no injury has occurred, yet.

I dislike it, but I understand it.

7
BigMikesDingALing 7 points ago +7 / -0

Do you really think that’s the reason, though? Or is it more likely the justices are gutless pieces of garbage? If the shoe were on the other foot, I guarantee that the liberal justices, including roberts, would have voted to hear the case.

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

Yes I do think that.

I don’t like working on “what if”, I work on what actually took place. The TX case wasn’t as air tight as believed and, while I personally like the stance the two conservative judges took, I think the right call was made.

It wasn’t dismissed on merit of evidence, but over procedural matters. Makes sense to me.

2
D0NNIE_DARK0 2 points ago +3 / -1

Then what was standing in Bush v Palm Beach?

1
ALargeRock 1 point ago +2 / -1

It was a different case with a different situation. I am not a lawyer and I haven’t looked as deeply into that specific case as this one.

I’m not here to fight with you or say that I like the way things happened. Just giving you my perspective on what happened with the Texas case.

1
Madmanmp 1 point ago +1 / -0

This has been explained but you can't educate the unwilling. You have to HAVE injury! Texas doesn't have injury YET. Until the votes from EVERY state has been certified can there be injury to another state. However Trump has received injury from the cheating states. So instead of Trump team filing to intervene for Texas they need to bring the case himself (Trump team) since he's the one with injury. The SC didn't turn down Texas because they don't believe in the suit they did because texas lacks standing as of now. I know all this is complicated and yes I was crushed too when I heard it! But Gen Flynn even said the Texas suit was just a bonus. It was never part of the plan. GEOTUS still has his day in the SC. Hold the line

1
OliverSmith 1 point ago +1 / -0

We'll see about that. I have a feeling that the SCOTUS would punt again when Trump refiles the cases himself. Are we allowed to call them names then or is there another 128D chess move being played?

1
Madmanmp 1 point ago +1 / -0

Believe what you want. Ive heard we're expecting them to punt it back to the states... Can talk what ifs all day but I'm just saying what u/ALargeRock was saying. It's not dismissed on Merit but on Standing! They haven't received damage yet.. And if infinity multidimensional chess moves are what you want to believe in... so be it.

12
Dalewyn 12 points ago +12 / -0

I will happily bet that IF one of Trump team's cases gets to SCOTUS, it'll get summarily thrown out due to either lack of standing for being filed too late or "lack of evidence".

I've seen enough to conclude that the courts are not acting in good faith; SCOTUS's response to Texas settled any doubt or naive hope I might have otherwise had.

4
drprepper 4 points ago +4 / -0

"You have to wait until Biden is inaugurated for any damage to be proven. No standing."

0
Madmanmp 0 points ago +1 / -1

Wrong. All Electoral votes are certified then there is standing.

2
drprepper 2 points ago +2 / -0

You could just as easily argue that because Biden hasn't actually been elected, there hasn't been damage, and therefore no standing. The Constitution only cares about the final result as far as "damages" are concerned, but that isn't how the law is applied.

The cheater states reneged on the contract with the "United" States. It happened already. Everyone has standing.

3
UkDeplorable 3 points ago +3 / -0

“We can’t hear you until the guy with the knife has cut you up”

1
BigFreedomBoner 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you are correct, which you are not, you know what they would have done? Given an opinion. They didn't. Because they have an indefensible position. Totally. The swing states broke their covenant and only party is competent to rule on the dispute jand that part just said they are not competent to rule on it without saying why.

They will tell you the why on everything On the msot important case of all time, nothing. Say it after me: Coup. Pronounced "coo."

A lot of judges had to hang at Nuremberg. They are among the first to collude due to their cowardly nature

26
Porkchop-express 26 points ago +26 / -0

I hate when shit makes sense but people in charge have no common sense!!

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
4
PlebbitorDestroyer 4 points ago +5 / -1

Agree except abolishing prisons.

8
acasper 8 points ago +8 / -0

Fair, I think that should happen at some point though not right away. If you cannot reintegrate then you should be exiled or killed, not kept in a cage.

5
DanIsSwell 5 points ago +5 / -0

*kept in a cage at a huge expense to tax payers.

It costs $70,000 a year, to keep one death row inmate in a cage, and feed him cheap food 3 times a day? Meanwhile, they keep him there for 20+ years. Right out of our taxes. It doesn’t even cost a single person that much to live on the outside, with rent and cat payments included. Meanwhile, they randomly set free a bunch of dangerous prisoners, while randomly keeping non dangerous ones locked up? And, if you’re a pedo, no problem. And, If you can pay enough bail money, suddenly you’re not dangerous and don’t have to be held at all. The prison system is another bullshit, overpriced way to steal money.

4
BoffoTheClown 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think your pet shop is ripping you off.

1
DanIsSwell 1 point ago +1 / -0

These expensive luxury cats are eating me out of house and home! Plus, now they want transitional surgery to become bunnies 🤦🏻‍♂️

1
drprepper 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or his cat is a Bernie bro.

26
FreedomFromGovt 26 points ago +26 / -0

That's because Socialism is internationalist: it puts the rights and welfare of the most remote populations, located the farthest away, ahead of those of its own people, who are propagandized to rejoice in the selfless altruism of this inversion. This perverse deconstruction of the human psyche to remove the sense of personhood was a critical component of building the 'New Soviet Man' who was basically a drone. Today's mask mandates function in the same way: "do it for others".

4
AnaMerican_1776 4 points ago +4 / -0

A very important fact that needs to be highlighted more often.

21
FluffiPuff 21 points ago +21 / -0

This is what is so heartbreaking about the case - not that it is the only one, or the best, but that came straight from the American People to the court.

Americans have no standing.

5
Anaconda 5 points ago +10 / -5

FUCK alito and thomas. they tried to hold our hands and tell us 'it will be okay' last night but they in fact said 'in the end we WOULD NOT GRANT ANY RELIEF WHATSOEVER'.

thomas and alito only said they would hear us. they also said they would not listen to us and actually listen to the arguments.

16
FuckReddit4545 16 points ago +16 / -0

We don't call it the clown world for nothing. Texas was brilliant, their lawyers were brilliant, it was a great argument. While I believe the SC cucked out, I'm still hopeful for other lawsuits in the pipeline.

2
DittoHead 2 points ago +2 / -0

Honestly I think every state on our side should keep filing similar lawsuits and **make scotus reject the American people 30 times.

14
Italians_Invented_2A 14 points ago +16 / -2

There must be consequences for SCOTUS. They have betrayed not only Trump, but they have refused to do their job and their constitutional role.

6
deleted 6 points ago +8 / -2
-17
Anaconda -17 points ago +6 / -23

ummm, if pedo joe gets 270 electoral votes on monday in the electoral college it is over unless the DOJ, DOD, DHS all assist the POTUS to stay in the presidency. there is a 0.001% chance any agency or department or bureau will help us and the POTUS out.

anybody claiming a miracle will happen on 12/18 are the same retards that said sidney powell had smoking gun evidence and the 'kraken' that she will release the wednesday before thanksgiving.

9
deleted 9 points ago +9 / -0
9
MustafaJones 9 points ago +9 / -0

The lesson here is that when it comes to terrorists there are no “prisoners” only KIA.

8
Svdden_Maga 8 points ago +8 / -0

The fuck does "standing" even mean?

6
RussianAgent13 6 points ago +6 / -0

NOBODY FUCKING KNOWS EVEN SCOTUS DOESNT KNOW

6
Grond999 6 points ago +6 / -0

In law, standing or locus standi is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case.

7
PlebbitorDestroyer 7 points ago +8 / -1

The thing is, Texas and the rest obviously have standing in this case. The rejection of the Texas case in SCOTUS seems purely about politics/optics. I have to believe that this was with the intention that future SCOTUS cases that go how we want them to will appear less biased. Time will tell.

5
Grond999 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah, I have pondered this too. We will see. Either way, this is going to go down as a truly historic period in time.

2
Txiribiton 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nothing, it is a buzzword in this case. All states are participating in the election, some go rogue and break the laws, supposedly this doesn't affect the other states according to retarded logic from judges. They don't want to do their job and they are perfectly fine with the fraudulent laws, elections and results from those states.

2
Anaconda 2 points ago +4 / -2

it's the same type of crap we have been receiving from GOP justices for decades if not 100+ years.

we had a 6-3 GOP majority SCOTUS and FIVE of them voted for roe v wade (7-2 decision). we had a 9-0 GOP majority SCOTUS 20 years later and FIVE of them voted for planned parenthood v casey (5-4 decision...TWO of the yes votes were ronald ray-gun appointed justices, LMAO)

1
Marshall2 1 point ago +1 / -0

WE PUNT rather than do our jobs.

4
aussie_maga 4 points ago +4 / -0

Watch Dinesh D'Souza's take on the Supreme Court decision.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwqEMXtLWBc

2
AnaMerican_1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

Outstanding video that needs to go viral, and should be played on a jumbotron in front of the SCOTUS 24/7.

1
TrumpAndGodWin 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks

4
MeSewCorny 4 points ago +4 / -0

Holy shit! Well said Tom!

4
rplgn 4 points ago +5 / -1

Imagine the shock of Tom Fitton. His belief in the justice system has got to be completely shatered.

4
cajun_robear 4 points ago +4 / -0

The court system needs draining as well.

4
MagaChief 4 points ago +4 / -0

So if Texas doesn’t have standing to bring its case anywhere what’s the solution?

They should file in ALL state courts they’re suing and see what happens!

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
Norwayhastrolls 4 points ago +4 / -0

Illegal aliens have standing.

3
RogueLeaderX 3 points ago +3 / -0

Truly revolting.

What’s sad is our own side is turning on us.

Trumps SCOTUS picks have no backbone. Only Thomas and Alito are worth a damn.

3
LtPatterson 3 points ago +3 / -0

I have a big problem with this. SCOTUS needs to act eventually here. And fast.

3
REDPILLEDBYALEXJONES 3 points ago +3 / -0

They are all cowards ....

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
SoldierofKek 3 points ago +3 / -0

Excellent point #secede, #ConstitionalStatesofAmerica

3
_shifty 3 points ago +3 / -0

AMMO BOX!!!

2
Serioush 2 points ago +2 / -0

I dislike SCOTUS saying the taxes case did not have standing,

but I know little about US law,

and think the way TD is turning on SCOTUS after the response is premature.

Considering the ~5 different ways actions can be taken after it.

Did we ever get an official response what the follow-up is?

2
45fan 2 points ago +2 / -0

ORIGINAL STANDING

2
Darth_Pepe 2 points ago +2 / -0

That’s fine, these courts are only interested in seeing black rifles and cowboy boots up their ass! We Texans will gladly oblige! Hooo-rah

2
slaphappy2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not Texas nor the other states that joined with them. What - 20 other states ?

1
PepesCovfefe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Isn’t that because Texas isn’t an individual?

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

SCROTUS

-1
H0tCar1z -1 points ago +1 / -2

I was actually thinking about this earlier. So here is the thing. Texas was suing for damages (claiming Kamala would be the damages). SCOTUS said, "No damages have been done yet". Which is why it was dismissed. If they get inaugurated, THEN they can sue for damages.

And with Biden being investigated, and Kamala recently named in Hunter's emails, it gives them a much stronger case. Im not saying that was necessarily the plan. But it can be now. Or perhaps they did know it all along. Also, once they are inaugurated, other states can sue as well. Instead of just saying "We support this lawsuit". I think anyways. Im no law expert

8
RussianAgent13 8 points ago +8 / -0

You may be right but it's too late then if Kamala has the military. She wouldn't step down even if ordered by the court.

1
H0tCar1z 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trump can call Marshall Law. Which dkesnt necessarily mean soldiers on the streets and tanks on every corner. It just means the military would intervene. In this situation they would have a Military Tribunal hold a Military hearing/trial. May be our last and only hope if these crooks keep sweeping this under the rug.

The dems.cheated and gave just enough to the Republicans to keep them silent. They gave them just enough house seats and state legislature wins to keep them from raising concern. Why would they want to jeopardize their jobs? We need a new party. Im done with the Republicans and the Democrats are beyond redemption

7
Junionthepipeline 7 points ago +7 / -0

Then the court says your too late to sue.so sorry.