Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They ruled your orange jesus to have engaged in an insurrection.Not even sure what Colorado was thinking.
Or illinois or Maine etcNot even sure what Colorado was thinking.
They ruled your orange jesus to have engaged in an insurrection.
I ruled Joe Biden has a Mush Brain.They ruled your orange jesus to have engaged in an insurrection.
why would theyNotably, no one touched on whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist? Even though that's a big part of the Colorado case? Chickenshits.
I look forward to reading in its entirety...I hear there's a little cat-fight in there lol.
Why not? I half expected Thomas and Alito to give it a shot.why would they
they ruled on what they were tasked to rule on, nothing more. maybe they should have touched on crabs fvcking in the bering straight while they were at it.Why not? I half expected Thomas and Alito to give it a shot.
Not really. See Argument II on page 33 of the brief filed by Trump's attorneys, the absolutely wanted a ruling on if Trump engaged in insurrection. That's why I expected those two to take the bait, they have a history of going off on a tangent (see Thomas in Dobbs).they ruled on what they were tasked to rule on, nothing more.
Notably, no one touched on whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist? Even though that's a big part of the Colorado case? Chickenshits.
That's the problem. You consider FACTS to be dumb. SleauxTard.
You dismiss facts, dumbass.That's the problem. You consider FACTS to be dumb. SleauxTard.
Aaaawww. Poor dumbass is mad today.Your orange jesus engaged in insurrection.
Who gives a shit what Colorado says. Do you want Alabama removing Mush Brain for some reason(or any other candidate)? Colorado can't unilaterally solve a federal case.I look forward to reading in its entirety...I hear there's a little cat-fight in there lol.
The liberal justices say allowing states to remove someone from the ballot invites "a chaotic state-by-state patchwork"....um, isn't that what we already have? This is the seeds of future bullshit I was concerned about.
Notably, no one touched on whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist? Even though that's a big part of the Colorado case? Chickenshits.
Aaaawww. Poor dumbass is mad today.
Your fault for setting yourself up for disappointment.
I told you the U.S. Supreme Court would teach you a lesson. The fact that you're a dumbass, is why you continue to live in denial.
Today's decision, though highly predictable, is a great day for America 🇺🇸
You're a lying idiot.You're wrong if you think I believe your trumptard appointed judges can manage to do the right thing.
Evidently, neither can your rethuglican appointed supreme court justices.Who gives a shit what Colorado says. Do you want Alabama removing Mush Brain for some reason(or any other candidate)? Colorado can't unilaterally solve a federal case.
Ugghhhhh, read the Constitution.Evidently, neither can your rethuglican appointed supreme court justices.
9-0, not 6-3Evidently, neither can your rethuglican appointed supreme court justices.
"They" didn't do anything. The Secretary of State tried to circumvent the U.S. Constitution.They ruled your orange jesus to have engaged in an insurrection.
Trump has not been charged with insurrection, nor has he been convicted of such. Move on.I look forward to reading in its entirety...I hear there's a little cat-fight in there lol.
The liberal justices say allowing states to remove someone from the ballot invites "a chaotic state-by-state patchwork"....um, isn't that what we already have? This is the seeds of future bullshit I was concerned about.
Notably, no one touched on whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist? Even though that's a big part of the Colorado case? Chickenshits.
Boy isn’t that the truth…
Greed gets erect when olbermann speaks
Sounds like Keith Olbermann is an insurrectionist
So tell us why Trump's attorneys asked SCOTUS to rule Trump didn't engage in insurrection. Should they move on?Trump has not been charged with insurrection, nor has he been convicted of such. Move on.
shit, the only wood that old bastard has gotten in the last 30 years came from a tree.Greed gets erect when olbermann speaks
I look forward to reading in its entirety...I hear there's a little cat-fight in there lol.
The liberal justices say allowing states to remove someone from the ballot invites "a chaotic state-by-state patchwork"....um, isn't that what we already have? This is the seeds of future bullshit I was concerned about.
Notably, no one touched on whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist? Even though that's a big part of the Colorado case? Chickenshits.
Then indict himYour orange jesus engaged in insurrection.
He has also been found liable for sexual abuse, defamation, and fraud. More to come.
So tell us why Trump's attorneys asked SCOTUS to rule Trump didn't engage in insurrection. Should they move on?
Today's ruling was on a criminal case?Show us the charge and/or conviction?
The SCOTUS doesn't rule on suppositions.
Today's ruling was on a criminal case?