Ad hominem fallacy. I am not the topic of this thread. FFS do I really have to explain why every American has a stake in every vote cast in every state? If course it is. The USSC holds the special distinction as the final arbiter of all matters with regard to the Constitution and the law. It is the last check in the system checks and balances and thus adjudicates on behalf of the people.
Right. In order for them to have heard it, they had to believe it had something resembling merit. LOL.
Strawman. You don't get to move the goalposts. The topic of this thread is one specific court. You should know this, yunno since it's your thread and all... See above. Then remember again this alleged "steal" you speak of is also not the topic of this thread. Please try to stay on topic. C. None of the above.
What's your point? SCOTUS not hearing the case is even worse. It means that the case is so lacking in any merit whatsoever, they already know the answer. That's not actually a point of pride for Team Trump. LOL.
Ad hominem fallacy. I am not the topic of this thread. That said, Biden's mental state as demonstrated when he speaks is a hair better than Reagan's at the end of his term. Thing is, Biden isn't even at the beginning of his term. Errr, Harris' term...
The lawsuit was dismissed by 2 courts before it got to SCOTUS, you should know this but maybe you don't. The entire premise for Trump's circus act is that the election was stolen, a massive fraud, please try to stay on topic. That wasn't one of the choices.
But this topic is? The SUPREME COURT. Legal actions typically start in lower courts so your pallid defense is moot. Ad hominem fallacy. You should know that I am not the topic of this thread. You offered unproven allegations in a rebuttal. If you want to discuss this "steal," you should start a thread on it. I can see your false dichotomy.
Actually, it's 100% proof that they didn't want to hear this case. Anyone who believed a CONSERVATIVE SC was going to get involved in a state's rights issue, was delusional. Be careful what you wish for.
How you can listen to Trump day after day and believe that Biden is the one with issues, is beyond me. Cult mentality is what it is, though.
I haven't defended anything worth defending. I merely gave you 2 choices. Neither am I. Hypocrite much? This is about a steal. Either there's massive election fraud perpetrated by nearly everyone who is not Trump and his sycophants, or there's massive election fraud being perpetrated by Trump and his tools. So I asked you to pick one. I can see your false choice selection.
Your pedantics are showing. Proof of nothing rationally-related to the topic. Clever, but not a states' rights issue: When a state violates its own laws -- as the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did -- the rights of the people are infringed by said state, and the remedy is adjudication in the federal courts. There is a clause tacked onto the end of the 10th Amendment: "nor prohibited by it," meaning delegated powers to the United States include jurisprudence. States do not have a right to invaldiate the votes of the people by fudging their own rules governing elections. Hence, the various legal actions on behalf of the people in the federal court system up to and including the USSC.
Says the guy who cites every logical fallacy known to man. Which court ruled that PA violated its own laws?
1. When the SCOTUS says they won't hear a case, it literally means they don't want to hear the case. What makes you think otherwise? 2. The SC of PA said the state violated no laws. They are the final arbiter of these things in PA. SCOTUS will not comment on it. They proved this yesterday, by saying they won't hear the case. Each state's Supreme Court has the final say on that state's internal issues. SCOTUS doesn't get involved in state's rights. The very best chance you have of that is with a liberal court, but even that is iffy. You all wanted a very conservative court. You have one. Now you get to see what that means. Psst: It doesn't mean republican court and it doesn't mean loyal to Trump, court.
Over 90 mysterious deaths with people involved closely with the Clintons. If you think that's a coincidence then there is no help for you.
Ad hominem fallacy. I am not the topic of this thread. None. And that is the issue. Because the evidence is there, prima facie.
You're your own straight man. Lol. Yes, that is the issue. Yet you claimed it as fact. What's that logical fallacy called? Medium rare. Extra horseradish.