To all the Trump Supporters here: Biden won. Trump Lost. Get over it. Move on..

@HoraceGreenley You know he lost. I know he lost.. Everyone says he lost..😷

@whowasthatmaskedman I didn't know that in addition to having a crystal ball you are also a constitutional scholar.

@HoraceGreenley Well you should learn stuff more often. Then you could make up your own words instead of using other peoples that you dont really understand.😷

@whowasthatmaskedman If that helps you sleep at night then stick with it.

@HoraceGreenley I sleep fine.. But then Trump isnt My President. ....Oh! Wait!.... He isnt yours either now...😷

@whowasthatmaskedman Sleeping fine is common among sociopaths and psychopaths.

@HoraceGreenley Thank you for the free therapy session. Look. You put up mems because you have a "side" to support and no real reasonable excuse to support them. Thats fine. But at the end of the day you are still American. I forgive you..😷

@whowasthatmaskedman Save it for someone that gives a shit

@Betterme So what? The real fun is with the supreme court

@HoraceGreenley The Supreme Court can’t unilaterally declare Trump the winner. Even Trump said he will leave if the EC votes for Biden.

@LeopoldBloom I never said that the supreme court could unilaterally declare a winner. That's not the point.

@HoraceGreenley it won’t go to the Supreme Court!! I truly hope you believe it will 🤣🤣😂😂😂

@Uachtarain There's already a case before the Supreme Court. There are several constitutional issues at stake. Of course it's going to the supreme court.

@HoraceGreenley Please describe the case before the Supreme Court, with a citation.

@LeopoldBloom It was filed last summer. The Supreme Court hasn't agreed to hear it yet. It refers to the extension of the deadline in Pennsylvania. I'm sure the court is waiting for the rest of the cases to be filed before accepting them.

@HoraceGreenley Did they grant certoriari or not? A citation would help.

The Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction in cases involving elections. It would have to be an appeal of a lower-court ruling.

There are two other problems. First, it wouldn't necessarily affect the outcome in PA if those votes were invalidated. Second, even if Biden loses PA, he still has enough EVs.

Wait, I found it. The Supreme Court already ruled in favor of PA, allowing them to count the late-arriving votes. Oh well, back to the drawing board.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/28/us/supreme-court-pennsylvania-north-carolina-absentee-ballots.html

@LeopoldBloom It was an appeal of a lower court ruling, i.e., the ruling of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to allow ballots to be accepted after election day. The legislature did not make this change. The constitution only allows state legislators to set election law.

@LeopoldBloom The court made it clear that it will revisit the case after the election.

@HoraceGreenley Since the Supreme Court only has appellate jurisdiction, they can only revisit the evidence presented in the lower court to determine if the lower court's decision was valid or not. It also doesn't "revisit" cases. The Supreme Court receives requests to hear around 10,000 cases per year, and takes around 100. There's no reason why they would waste their time on a case that won't even change the result in one state.

People seem to have this idea that the Supreme Court will say "well, there were enough questions about this election to call it into doubt, so we'll invalidate it and award Trump a second term." There's simply no constitutional basis for that. Even Trump has accepted that he won't be president after January 20, even if he won't come out and say that.

@LeopoldBloom The Supreme Court has more than an appellate function. You're incorrect in your assertion.

@HoraceGreenley it’s really rather sweet that you expect the Supreme Court to nullify Biden’s overwhelming victory and award the election to Trump just because he appointed three of the justices.
You think the Supreme Court will somehow think they owe him a favour????🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

@Uachtarain Trump certainly thinks the Supreme court owes him a favour.. But he seems to be missing the point that a number of the cases he has bought so far have been brutally thrown out by Trump appointment judges already. Trump still thinks every person in their job owes himpersonal loyalty. Like Comey.😷

@HoraceGreenley Giuliani can't withhold evidence from a lower court (which he's been doing) only to spring it on the Supreme Court.

Do you actually think that the Supreme Court will rule "gosh, there may have been some irregularities, so let's declare Trump the winner." Why even have an election in that case? Just have the Supreme Court vote on who the next president should be.

@whowasthatmaskedman The justices aren't completely obtuse (OK, maybe Thomas, Alito, and Beer Keg are). They know the court's reputation is at risk. They're not going to put their thumb on the scale to invalidate what in normal times (i.e. without Trump involved) would be a straightforward election with a clear winner.