Fuckers couldn't wait to run to the Supreme Court

[CatWoman]

GOP asking for emergency order to invalidate ballots in PA

[leftofthestorm]

1. watching now nt

[Thekaspervote]

2. On what grounds??

[leftofthestorm]

5. They want to stop the count in PA

[unblock]

13. on the grounds that he appointed three of the justices, of course.

[Happy Hoosier]

30. On the grounds he lost. NT

[phylny]

36. I believe it's commonly known as the

"Hereby!" clause.

Sorry to joke. Goodness, I wish Trump would evaporate.

[bullimiami]

3. why? because they didnt vote for trump? child please.

[PatSeg]

4. Yeah, guess we shouldn't be surprised

Still that was pretty fast.

[spanone]

6. States Rights

[BComplex]

7. The ensuing civil war will be on GOP hands, should they prevail.

It would get really ugly.

[Drunken Irishman]

8. They're not asking to invalidate ballots. They're requesting to segregate ballots...

... that arrived after polls closed on 11/3.

They're just asking they not be part of the final total right now.

[BComplex]

12. All ballots postmarked by election day are supposed to be counted.

Period.

[Drunken Irishman]

18. It's not period.

We'll see what the Supreme Court says.

[PTWB]

22. Amazing that people say Period when something is clearly not settled.

Like saying PERIOD changes anything about the facts.

[PTWB]

19. No.

In PA the law says that they have to be received on Election Day or before. The PA Supreme Court extended that by 3 days but that’s likely to be overturned.

But it doesn’t matter - there aren’t many of those votes and not enough to flip it back to Trump.

[In It to Win It]

31. Right!

My primary question when hearing about this is

Wasn’t this same exact question in this same exact situation already presented to the court before? Wasn’t that the 4-4 split vote?

[csziggy]

23. The PA SOS said they were doing that this morning if I heard it right

So why would the Trump campaign waste everybody's time taking it to the courts?

[PRETZEL]

27. Because it's the Trump Campaign nt

[Laelth]

24. That's fine, imo.

They’re different “classes” of votes. They should be separated. I suspect that Pennsylvania would have done this anyway.

In fact, that’s what I suspect will happen, here. The Court will dismiss the case as moot because Pennsylvania has already granted Plaintiff (Trump) his desired relief.



-Laelth

[ret5hd]

35. Make each on 3/5 of a vote!!!

[nolabear]

9. Apparently few ballots involved though.

[jpak]

10. Maybe there's a sense of The American Way in those fuckers

But I doubt it.

[C_U_L8R]

11. They're gonna use up all their ammo in one dumb shot.

Sure, proceed. Whatever. Maybe they'll finally shut up and concede like grownups.

[leftofthestorm]

14. Trust and believe that Handmaid will be asked by the SOS

to recuse herself. So they need 5 votes.

[PTWB]

15. Chill.

SCOTUS isn’t going to flip the race.

They may give him a win in not counting the ballots that came in after Election Day because that’s the law - but Joe DOESN’T NEED THOSE TO WIN!

[In It to Win It]

33. The ballots they are asking to block have not been included in the vote totals yet?

[Wednesdays]

34. No, they were set aside. nt

[Demsrule86]

16. Those would be the ones that arrived after election day...and it won't change the

numbers.

[spanone]

17. What is their evidence, I wonder?

[getagrip_already]

20. relax....

Unless I'm missing something happening at scotus, this is a penn state court judge issuing an order to segregate PROVISIONAL ballots in case it turns out they are invalid under state law (someone voted by mail and in person).

It's only about 30k ballots, and he didn't say they couldn't be counted. He just wants to make sure they don't disappear into the general population.

At least that's what I get from various reports.

[Spazito]

21. Not a surprise...

When the Supreme Court refused to act the second time the repubs requested they do so, it was clear 4 of the Justices invited the repubs to try again.

The repubs assume there is a ton of votes involved but it may well be there is not and the question becomes moot.

My bet is the Supreme Court waits it out to see how the contested ballots would affect the outcome rather than act to supersede the rights of the State preemptively. I could be totally wrong on this but I'm betting Roberts will put his legacy and the credibility of the USSC in the forefront.

[gratuitous]

25. Sounds like this is the basket into which they're putting all their eggs

When Pennsylvania goes for Biden, the election is well and truly over.

[no_hypocrisy]

26. Uncertain first application could go to the USSC.

I think that first stop would be local federal district court, then federal appeals, then USSC.

[sunonmars]

29. Not to mention PA SC

[no_hypocrisy]

32. Agreed. For one thing, the USSC doesn't look at evidence. It looks at law.

Until you have a trial with a trier of fact to determine if there is fraud, the case can't advance.

[Brainfodder]

28. Please proceed you excellent sore losers, this should play well!

If you are emotionally tied to the super jerk, that is your fault.
Here's your unhappy meal with a side of a purple drink, have FUN!

[leftofthestorm]

37. Sam Alito said they had to keep the ballots separate and is

going to refer it to the whole court.