Treasonous Supreme Court refuses to hear latest AZ. case showing voter fraud

Romeo458

That Guy
PX Member
Minuteman
Sep 20, 2019
700
848
NEIA
I am also not excited to see the verdict with the latest 2a case they are about to issue a royal decree on.
 

chrome

Private
PX Member
Minuteman
  • Aug 21, 2005
    1,547
    2,343
    SoCal
    I find the idea of dismissing a case without comment, just fucking annoying. I know there are reasons, but makes me wish in my job I could opt-in to the idea of:

    Boss (the people) : "I have something you need to look at and investigate and comment on.."

    Me (SCOTUS) : "I am not doing that"

    Boss (the people) : "FML"


    The nine justices, without comment, dismissed (pdf) a request by Pinal County resident Staci Burk to find evidence of election fraud. Burk had sought access to ballots to prove that some were invalid or fraudulent.
     

    theLBC

    Shiftless
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 21, 2019
    9,466
    20,007
    that was sort of a worthless effort, sorry.
    eyes on the target and maricopa will tell us enough, or not.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Charger442

    samadisoulcrusher

    Private
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 27, 2012
    212
    477
    57
    Minn
    Why does anybody have any faith in a single government institution ?
    The only faith any of us should have is in the total Corruption of all government !
    Every level from local to state to Federal is corrupt , As is all the media and big corporations .
    Roberts is compromised or a coward . probably both .
    Never trust the dirty black robed bastards !
     

    wade2big

    Knowing just enough to be dangerous
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 16, 2017
    4,421
    4,892
    TEXAS
    Why does anybody have any faith in a single government institution ?
    The only faith any of us should have is in the total Corruption of all government !
    Every level from local to state to Federal is corrupt , As is all the media and big corporations .
    Roberts is compromised or a coward . probably both .
    Never trust the dirty black robed bastards !
    Is this the same FBI that participated in the coup of a sitting President?
    So now the Supreme Court has also participated in the coup of a sitting President.
    This is the message that Americans need to hear and understand. The right wing talk radio bullshit has to stop.
     

    BLKWLFK9

    Just F'n Send It..
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 13, 2017
    2,715
    4,299
    I can promise you, the SC doesn't want to make any waves that might piss off the left until after the 2022 election to see which way the wind blows. If the left retains power, the SC knows without a doubt that they will pack the court. If the right retakes the house/senate, they aren't as worried about that coming down on them. Even the leftist justices dont want the court packed. Im not saying this is right, but i will bet a dollar to a donut that this is true. I wish they just wouldn't take any cases until after the next election, then when the right sweeps the left, they keep a busy schedule of hearing cases.
     

    SilentStalkr

    Wonna Be Badass
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 8, 2012
    5,431
    5,668
    40
    Somewhere in the US
    I am also not excited to see the verdict with the latest 2a case they are about to issue a royal decree on.
    Who the fuck cares? 2A is pretty clear and is the law of the land until they go through a constitutional amendment process, which ain’t going to happen. So they can do or say whatever. It doesn’t mean anything. They don’t write laws!

    that was sort of a worthless effort, sorry.
    eyes on the target and maricopa will tell us enough, or not.
    Does it really matter? Until enough people wake up and take action, no amount of evidence will change anything.
     

    SilentStalkr

    Wonna Be Badass
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 8, 2012
    5,431
    5,668
    40
    Somewhere in the US
    I can promise you, the SC doesn't want to make any waves that might piss off the left until after the 2022 election to see which way the wind blows. If the left retains power, the SC knows without a doubt that they will pack the court. If the right retakes the house/senate, they aren't as worried about that coming down on them. Even the leftist justices dont want the court packed. Im not saying this is right, but i will bet a dollar to a donut that this is true. I wish they just wouldn't take any cases until after the next election, then when the right sweeps the left, they keep a busy schedule of hearing cases.
    Hence is a large fucking problem of the government. Strategize to not do a bunch of shit basically while we still pay them and they justify that we somehow need them to function as a country. It’s all bullshit.
     

    37L1

    Resident Ralphie
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 26, 2009
    151
    126
    72
    Tennessee
    Blah, blah, blah. As much as you want to believe, the person who filed the case was too stupid and too late.

    From the linked article:

    Earlier this year, the Arizona Supreme Court issued a ruling that agreed with a trial court judge in Pinal County that Burk lacked the right to contest the election. The reason given was that she wasn’t a registered voter at the time she filed her lawsuit, as required in state election contests. Both courts also agreed that she made her legal challenge too late, after the five-day period for filing such an action had passed.
     

    wade2big

    Knowing just enough to be dangerous
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 16, 2017
    4,421
    4,892
    TEXAS
    Blah, blah, blah. As much as you want to believe, the person who filed the case was too stupid and too late.

    From the linked article:

    Earlier this year, the Arizona Supreme Court issued a ruling that agreed with a trial court judge in Pinal County that Burk lacked the right to contest the election. The reason given was that she wasn’t a registered voter at the time she filed her lawsuit, as required in state election contests. Both courts also agreed that she made her legal challenge too late, after the five-day period for filing such an action had passed.
    Notice laws didn’t apply to those committing election fraud. Seems like laws are to protect the criminals as always. Burn this system to the ground.
     

    37L1

    Resident Ralphie
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 26, 2009
    151
    126
    72
    Tennessee
    Notice laws didn’t apply to those committing election fraud. Seems like laws are to protect the criminals as always.
    Notice that the SC was correct on their decision not to hear this case based on the facts from the lower courts.
     

    SilentStalkr

    Wonna Be Badass
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 8, 2012
    5,431
    5,668
    40
    Somewhere in the US
    Blah, blah, blah. As much as you want to believe, the person who filed the case was too stupid and too late.

    From the linked article:

    Earlier this year, the Arizona Supreme Court issued a ruling that agreed with a trial court judge in Pinal County that Burk lacked the right to contest the election. The reason given was that she wasn’t a registered voter at the time she filed her lawsuit, as required in state election contests. Both courts also agreed that she made her legal challenge too late, after the five-day period for filing such an action had passed.
    Wow! Was that really what this was hinging on? 🤣
     

    wade2big

    Knowing just enough to be dangerous
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 16, 2017
    4,421
    4,892
    TEXAS
    Notice that the SC was correct on their decision not to hear this case based on the facts from the lower courts.
    SC is doing a great job protecting their masters. The courts allowed illegal voting orders to stand in order to overthrow an administration but use laws as written to stop any attempt to correct. Fuck that noise.
     

    37L1

    Resident Ralphie
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 26, 2009
    151
    126
    72
    Tennessee
    Wow! Was that really what this was hinging on? 🤣
    Bring s case with someone with proper standing and within the law's stated time period. that's how it's supposed to work.

    Not commenting on whether there was fraud or not but just on this particular case. That's how the law works, like it or not, so get it together if you want to be heard.

    What do you expect? Remember, you are dealing with lawyers . . .
     

    37L1

    Resident Ralphie
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 26, 2009
    151
    126
    72
    Tennessee
    SC is doing a great job protecting their masters. The courts allowed illegal voting orders to stand in order to overthrow an administration but use laws as written to stop any attempt to correct. Fuck that noise.
    That has nothing to do with the nature of this particular case.

    Why wasn't the plaintiff a registered voter with standing to bring this action?

    Why wasn't it filed in a timely manner?

    Your ire should be directed at her and those like her who didn't get the ball rolling in proper order.
     

    wade2big

    Knowing just enough to be dangerous
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 16, 2017
    4,421
    4,892
    TEXAS
    That has nothing to do with the nature of this particular case.

    Why wasn't the plaintiff a registered voter with standing to bring this action?

    Why wasn't it filed in a timely manner?

    Your ire should be directed at her and those like her who didn't get the ball rolling in proper order.
    I do understand what you are saying and I would typically agree. Why does the law as written apply for any case pertaining to election fraud, yet does not apply to any illegal legislation that allowed it?

    These blatant double standards proves what I already know. The US govt and all its institutions are corrupt. Same for the states. Same for the counties. Same for the cities. This whole system is shit.
     

    37L1

    Resident Ralphie
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 26, 2009
    151
    126
    72
    Tennessee
    I do understand what you are saying and I would typically agree. Why does the law as written apply for any case pertaining to election fraud, yet does not apply to any illegal legislation that allowed it?

    These blatant double standards proves what I already know. The US govt and all its institutions are corrupt. Same for the states. Same for the counties. Same for the cities. This whole system is shit.
    It's been that way for a long time, it just depends on who is on the "receiving" end.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: wade2big

    wade2big

    Knowing just enough to be dangerous
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 16, 2017
    4,421
    4,892
    TEXAS
    It's been that way for a long time, it just depends on who is on the "receiving" end.
    Yes sir. As far as I’m concerned no laws apply any longer. For example, I have been summoned for jury duty. My county can shove that summons right up their asses.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: myronman3

    Choid

    Anti-vaxxer
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    2,825
    1,898
    Yes sir. As far as I’m concerned no laws apply any longer. For example, I have been summoned for jury duty. My county can shove that summons right up their asses.
    I'd definitely want you on my jury. Don't deprive your fellow citizens of the right to have a true government skeptic on the jury.
     

    wade2big

    Knowing just enough to be dangerous
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 16, 2017
    4,421
    4,892
    TEXAS
    I'd definitely want you on my jury. Don't deprive your fellow citizens of the right to have a true government skeptic on the jury.
    I don’t see how I could take part in this mess believing what I do. Let’s not derail the thread @Choid as it wasn’t my intentions.
     

    rustyinbend

    GySgt USMC 1976-1992
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Dec 9, 2018
    1,271
    1,062
    Bend, Oregon
    Does everyone understand that refusal to consider a case, means the court has determined the case has insufficient evidence, lacks status, or has no merit? It's not a "no answer" response ... it's a "no merit" response. It's OK to disagree with that decision, but it's still a decision. It's the court's way of saying "Previous cases on this topic were decided correctly, and any reconsideration by SCOTUS would result in wasted time, and the same result."
     

    BullGear

    Huckleberry Dillinger
    PX Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 29, 2017
    4,704
    8,680
    Hazzard County
    I don't know why THIS SCOTUS is so set against reviewing any case brought to them that is associated with the 2020 election. Is there a precedence for their action or is this Roberts flexing his muscle?
     

    Choid

    Anti-vaxxer
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    2,825
    1,898
    Does everyone understand that refusal to consider a case, means the court has determined the case has insufficient evidence, lacks status, or has no merit? It's not a "no answer" response ... it's a "no merit" response. It's OK to disagree with that decision, but it's still a decision. It's the court's way of saying "Previous cases on this topic were decided correctly, and any reconsideration by SCOTUS would result in wasted time, and the same result."
    That's not actually true. It may be true in this case, but often they don't hear cases because they aren't interesting law, don't appeal to anybody on the court or don't consider an important constitutional question. The idea that not granting cert is a determination is nuts.
     

    NoDopes

    Supporter
    Supporter
    PX Member
    Minuteman
    Dec 6, 2020
    173
    145
    North Texas
    The problem is that the SC (and lower courts) refused to hear any cases before the election or after... to early, to late, no standing(??!?) and at this point 'it doesn't matter...'.