>

The cherry on the cake is that the Q propagandists (who are incredibly good at what they do, given the market they are targeting), cover their bases by making a dozen predictions each day. Then when one comes true they say ‘SEE! We were right so we’ll be right about the others too!”. Broken clock theory at its finest.
They started out with very specific predictions (x event will happen on this exact date) and then kept being more and more vague. For a few months now my buddy has basically stopped passing them on, but at one point he’d say ‘something big is supposed to happen tomorrow. You’ll be sorry for ever doubting.’ I’d ask him what was going to happen and he would just repeat that there’s murmurs of something big doing down. 
Apparently that’s all it takes to keep them tuning in for more. ‘Something big could happen tomorrow or maybe next week or the month after!’ Which could literally be anything. The shotgun approach to prognosticating.
I'm starting to think Donald Trump will never win the 2020 election >

Im still in utter shock that JFK Jr didn’t return from dead and help king clown back into office. How could that be wrong? It seems so rational. >

“It’s gonna happen, these things take time. You just wait!” - my QAnon friend, who has discovered infinite patience he never knew he had before. Though, it’s not really patience I suppose; it’s more like the parent jingling keys in front of the baby to make it forget why it’s crying. “Hey, why didn’t that 100% certain prediction come true?” “Don’t worry, it will, but have you heard about this thing you need to be angry about?!? It’s shocking!! Get angry!!!” >

I know. They said nothing could stop the storm. But remember these are the same people who have been waiting over 2000 years for the return of the dude who was supposed to come back 2000 years ago >

The cherry on the cake is that the Q propagandists (who are incredibly good at what they do, given the market they are targeting), cover their bases by making a dozen predictions each day. Then when one comes true they say ‘SEE! We were right so we’ll be right about the others too!”. Broken clock theory at its finest.
They started out with very specific predictions (x event will happen on this exact date) and then kept being more and more vague. For a few months now my buddy has basically stopped passing them on, but at one point he’d say ‘something big is supposed to happen tomorrow. You’ll be sorry for ever doubting.’ I’d ask him what was going to happen and he would just repeat that there’s murmurs of something big doing down. 
Apparently that’s all it takes to keep them tuning in for more. ‘Something big could happen tomorrow or maybe next week or the month after!’ Which could literally be anything. The shotgun approach to prognosticating. >

For over a year these people would tell me they were making popcorn in order to watch all the trials they promised me were going to happen within days. I don’t think they talk about making popcorn anymore but they’re still sure it’s going to happen any day now. They’ve sunk so much time and effort into believing this shit and doing their own “research” into it that they can’t now admit it was all a foolish waste of time >

Of course not. My childhood friend has been indoctrinated for the past 2.5 years. He’s a seasonal worker who doesn’t love to work. So when he isn’t working (half the year) he’s listening to 4-6 hours per day of this propaganda. He has podcasts and YouTube videos in one ear while he falls asleep, or while he watched sports or plays video games, but mostly while he scrolls his Instagram and Telegram and Signal apps. 
Imagine having to face the reality that he’s spent thousands of hours for nothing (being fooled). He can’t do it. At this point he’s need a detox and deprogramming therapy, which to him would be literally joining Satan worshipers. Not figuratively; he believes Dems and anyone rich or anyone who provides conflicting information to be influenced by Satan or evil Jews or the new world order or Bill Gates or Soros, etc. 
It’s a lost cause. >

Text for those who can't see b/c paywall:

Three Utah brothers seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election and return Donald Trump to the White House will not have their longshot lawsuit heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The litigation, Brunson v. Adams et. al., claimed nearly 400 members of Congress violated their oaths of office by not investigating claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election and voting to certify Joe Biden’s win.
Raland Brunson, the lead plaintiff in the suit, along with brothers Loy and Deron, asked for those members of Congress, along with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, to be removed from office and barred from ever running again. Similarly, former Vice President Mike Pence would also be banned from holding another elective office.
In an order published Monday, the Supreme Court said it would not hear the Utahn’s case.
On Friday, a small group of Bronson’s supporters met outside the Supreme Court in hopes of encouraging justices to hear their arguments.
The suit also ignored the order of presidential succession laid out in the Constitution by asking that Donald Trump be made eligible to return to the White House.
According to Deron Brunson, lawmakers’ refusal to look into election fraud claims was akin to treason and an “act of war” against the United States. No credible evidence has been presented of widespread fraud during the 2020 presidential election or that it impacted the outcome.
The suit also asked for more than $2.9 billion in damages that the court make that payout tax-free.
The Brunsons did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the ruling.
On social media, Raland Brunson set the stage for Monday’s denial. “Don’t think for a second that my brothers and I are not prepared for denial. We’ve got plenty of chess pieces still at play and we still have our queen,” he wrote on his Facebook page.
Following Monday’s decision, Raland expressed disappointment on Facebook but said they planned to ask the court to reconsider.
The case was initially dismissed by a federal judge for lack of standing. The brothers appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals but were denied, leading to Monday’s denial by the Supreme Court.
Several media figures on the far right were hyping the case in the days leading up to Monday’s decision, including some prominent influencers in the QAnon conspiracy theory movement. >

The podcast Opening Arguments did a break down of why this case is total bullshit if anyone cares to listen. They break it down in easy to understand terms. Epidsode # 668. Episode is even done to appeal to those who may be inclined to believe this case has merit. >

Going out on limb to guess it got thrown out because this...

nearly 400 members of Congress violated their oaths of office by not investigating claims of voter fraud

...is not at all how it's supposed to work anyway? That's not the job of Congress, that's for the DoJ and FBI to do.
Really hope they get some frivolous-lawsuit charges for filing over a question which could have been answered with a 2-minute Google. >

The Q boards are on fire after this. They say the next step is an appeal to a military tribunal lol. And if the military doesn’t step in, it’s militia time.  That a time to be alive >

i bet they emboldened by brasil too >

And who funded this boondoggle? >

Exactly. >

Their lawyers need to be disbarred. >

Iirc, they were pro se - they represented themselves. >

They should be charged with wasting the Courts time when.. >

Does any of those 400 include the ones that were elected on the same ballot Trump lost on or do they conveniently skip over that fact like every other Republican? >

Oh it most certainly does include Republicans who beat Democrats, but voted for Biden or didn't vote for President at all.
I've asked the same thing in AskTrumpSupporters but have never gotten an honest reply. >

Full text since it's behind a paywall:  

Supreme Court rejects Utah brothers’ lawsuit seeking to return Donald Trump to the White House
By Bryan Schott  | Jan. 9, 2023, 5:05 p.m.
The lawsuit said nearly 400 members of Congress should be removed from office for failing to investigate claims of fraud in the 2020 election
(Jose Luis Magana | AP) The U.S. Supreme Court is seen early Tuesday, May 3, 2022 in Washington. The Supreme Court, on Monday, Jan. 9, 2023, rejected a lawsuit brought by three Utah brothers seeking to return Donald Trump to the White House.
Three Utah brothers seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election and return Donald Trump to the White House will not have their longshot lawsuit heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The litigation, Brunson v. Adams et. al., claimed nearly 400 members of Congress violated their oaths of office by not investigating claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election and voting to certify Joe Biden’s win.
Raland Brunson, the lead plaintiff in the suit, along with brothers Loy and Deron, asked for those members of Congress, along with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, to be removed from office and barred from ever running again. Similarly, former Vice President Mike Pence would also be banned from holding another elective office.
In an order published Monday, the Supreme Court said it would not hear the Utahn’s case.
On Friday, a small group of Bronson’s supporters met outside the Supreme Court in hopes of encouraging justices to hear their arguments.
The suit also ignored the order of presidential succession laid out in the Constitution by asking that Donald Trump be made eligible to return to the White House.
According to Deron Brunson, lawmakers’ refusal to look into election fraud claims was akin to treason and an “act of war” against the United States. No credible evidence has been presented of widespread fraud during the 2020 presidential election or that it impacted the outcome.
The suit also asked for more than $2.9 billion in damages that the court make that payout tax-free.
The Brunsons did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the ruling.
On social media, Raland Brunson set the stage for Monday’s denial. “Don’t think for a second that my brothers and I are not prepared for denial. We’ve got plenty of chess pieces still at play and we still have our queen,” he wrote on his Facebook page.
Following Monday’s decision, Raland expressed disappointment on Facebook but said they planned to ask the court to reconsider.
The case was initially dismissed by a federal judge for lack of standing. The brothers appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals but were denied, leading to Monday’s denial by the Supreme Court.
Several media figures on the far right were hyping the case in the days leading up to Monday’s decision, including some prominent influencers in the QAnon conspiracy theory movement. >

How does such a frivolous lawsuit make it all the way to the Supreme Court? >

It didn't. 
It was rejected at the trial court level. They appealed that dismissal to the appeals court, which then rejected the appeal. They appealed that to the Supreme and the Supreme rejected it again. It didn't "make it" to anywhere. >

They appealed that to the Supreme and the Supreme rejected it again.
So…it made it all the way to the Supreme Court.  It never even should have made it that far through the appeals process is the point…it should have been laughed away on day one. >

The supreme court declined to hear the case, meaning the decision by the appellate court stands.
Taking away someone's right to an appeal is a pretty bad precedent, I would advise against it. >

Taking away someone’s right to an appeal is a pretty bad precedent, I would advise against it.
Letting every single batshit crazy lawsuit make it all the way up the appeals process to the Supreme Court is an even worse precedent.  I would definitely advise against it. >

What we should do is have people who judge whether a lawsuit is worth pursuing or not, and then if people think they made a bad call, someone can take the judgment of that person to a panel of 3 more people with more experience, who can judge whether the first person's judgments were right or wrong, and either allow the case to continue or keep it shut down.
We could even have a panel of 9 people, who have super good judgment to make sure that even those middle people who are making judgment calls do the right thing.  We can call them the supreme judgment people.
I like this system.  I think I will call it the "super awesome people figuring out laws and rules system."  Or maybe the "justice system* I don't know it's still a work in progress. >

That’s great.  Glad you think the judges have plenty of time to consider every single bat shit crazy course case in the entire country.
And apparently the bat-shit crazier the case, the more important it is that it makes it all the way up to the Supreme Court.
So according to you, since my local judge refused to throw out my parking ticket, I should just appeal it up to the Supreme Court.  Since they’ve got plenty of time on their hands, and they’re the ultimate court in this “super awesome” system of yours. >

You realize that people have to pay for an appeal, right? And that money goes towards the judges' pay?  If you want to appeal a traffic ticket be my guest, it's your money.  But there is a reason why the courts function the way they do and it is to provide a system to address issues with the law.  I like being able to appeal a trial court judge's decision to include/exclude a witness or to improperly hear/dismiss a case, because it provides clear resolution and avoids fascism by a single panel/person at one level of the court system.
The Supreme Court gets about 7000 applications for "cert" each year, and they have whole staffs of people dedicated to handling them.  This case would have been a 5-10 minute thing as well, as there was no federal question or circuit split at issue, so it really didn't eat into their available time.  This is literally why we have judges and justices, I don't mind having them do their jobs. >

But there is a reason why the courts function the way they do
Kinda getting the sense you don’t really understand how courts function the way they do.   Unless you’re implying $$$$ is what makes the courts go round. >

Well, we pay the judges...so yes? >

But its not a cult.  /s >

I listened to a podcast about this. It’s an absolutely batshit lawsuit, filled with zero facts or evidence.. of course it was thrown out.
But how batshit was it? Aside from demanding 45 be placed back in office immediately they were seeking damages of 2.9 TRILLION DOLLARS, and I shit you not not explicitly said they want it “tax free” >

Justice Thomas was obviously not the one to get this petition… >

I have a feeling their family tree looks like a wreath.. >

I suspect it’s the Utah Supreme Court, not SCOTUS but the page is Paywalled for me. >

This was that Brunson V Adams some of the Q/MAGA crowd have been shouting about. So yeah, US Supreme Court, not just Utah. 
They didn’t understand how the SC works and assumed that because it was on for review to decide to take it or not, that it would be decided on Jan 6th and Trump would be President again. 
Another big fat L for those crazy people. >

Hold on. Are you saying Right Wing Freedom Fighters don’t understand how government or laws work? That can’t be right. >

After all they all "do the research"... >

Perhaps they will storm the Supreme Court and do mock trial and shit... >

Next up, trial of century involving milk and a cookie! >

People vs Santa Claus for theft of milk and cookies >

I wonder how each Justice voted??? >

They didn't. They just had their lowest-level intern scrawl "FUCK NO!" on the first page and throw it out the window. >

How did it get to the Supreme Court? >

Was dismissed due to lack of standing then refused at every other level they appealed at. This was the last possible appeal and the USSC refused to hear it. >

"No credible evidence has been presented of widespread fraud during the 2020 presidential election or that it impacted the outcome."
So basically just like every single other case involving claims of election fraud. >

Paywall. >

And yet there is not enough money for useful things in this country... >

And we are all dumber now for having to read this. >

Makes sense every lower court refused to hear the case, so of course, SCOTUS will take it up.   /s. >

The qultists aren't too happy about this
You love to see it >

Yet another L >

Lawsuit written with crayons? >

Saturday I got hotheaded with the owner of the shop I manage over this moronic lawsuit. I don't get how such a brilliant man can fall for this crap or even hope on it. He' response was what's wrong with asking the question... Um, read the Constitution and you'll know why it's dumb af to ask the question. >

Can't get passed the paywall. Why did this suit even get to SCOTUS? Does that mean I can sue in  the Court anytime I want? >

Their conservatives are dense. >

I wonder how many years more will we hear about this nonsense. Give it up, Republicans. He lost. Bigly. >

It’s mind boggling to realize that in order to be considered for the Federal Supreme Court it has to have gone through all the other lower courts including the state Supreme Court.
All those courts and judges are willing to do away with the will of the people and the democratic process. Remember that. >


in order to be considered for the Federal Supreme Court it has to have gone through all the other lower courts including the state Supreme Court.

Not true - federal issues (like this one) go through the federal court system. And if you read the article, this case "went through" the federal court system as follows: Federal Court case denied for lack of standing, Appeals Court refused to hear the case, Supreme Court refused to hear the case. So they literally (and rightfully) never had a day in court. >

How did this even make it to the Supreme Court? >

How did this case make it to the supreme court? Like wtf >

How the hell did this trite even make it that far?? >

I'm starting to think Donald Trump will never win the 2020 election >

Im still in utter shock that JFK Jr didn’t return from dead and help king clown back into office. How could that be wrong? It seems so rational. >

“It’s gonna happen, these things take time. You just wait!” - my QAnon friend, who has discovered infinite patience he never knew he had before. Though, it’s not really patience I suppose; it’s more like the parent jingling keys in front of the baby to make it forget why it’s crying. “Hey, why didn’t that 100% certain prediction come true?” “Don’t worry, it will, but have you heard about this thing you need to be angry about?!? It’s shocking!! Get angry!!!” >

I know. They said nothing could stop the storm. But remember these are the same people who have been waiting over 2000 years for the return of the dude who was supposed to come back 2000 years ago >

The cherry on the cake is that the Q propagandists (who are incredibly good at what they do, given the market they are targeting), cover their bases by making a dozen predictions each day. Then when one comes true they say ‘SEE! We were right so we’ll be right about the others too!”. Broken clock theory at its finest.
They started out with very specific predictions (x event will happen on this exact date) and then kept being more and more vague. For a few months now my buddy has basically stopped passing them on, but at one point he’d say ‘something big is supposed to happen tomorrow. You’ll be sorry for ever doubting.’ I’d ask him what was going to happen and he would just repeat that there’s murmurs of something big doing down. 
Apparently that’s all it takes to keep them tuning in for more. ‘Something big could happen tomorrow or maybe next week or the month after!’ Which could literally be anything. The shotgun approach to prognosticating. >

For over a year these people would tell me they were making popcorn in order to watch all the trials they promised me were going to happen within days. I don’t think they talk about making popcorn anymore but they’re still sure it’s going to happen any day now. They’ve sunk so much time and effort into believing this shit and doing their own “research” into it that they can’t now admit it was all a foolish waste of time >

Of course not. My childhood friend has been indoctrinated for the past 2.5 years. He’s a seasonal worker who doesn’t love to work. So when he isn’t working (half the year) he’s listening to 4-6 hours per day of this propaganda. He has podcasts and YouTube videos in one ear while he falls asleep, or while he watched sports or plays video games, but mostly while he scrolls his Instagram and Telegram and Signal apps. 
Imagine having to face the reality that he’s spent thousands of hours for nothing (being fooled). He can’t do it. At this point he’s need a detox and deprogramming therapy, which to him would be literally joining Satan worshipers. Not figuratively; he believes Dems and anyone rich or anyone who provides conflicting information to be influenced by Satan or evil Jews or the new world order or Bill Gates or Soros, etc. 
It’s a lost cause. >

Text for those who can't see b/c paywall:

Three Utah brothers seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election and return Donald Trump to the White House will not have their longshot lawsuit heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The litigation, Brunson v. Adams et. al., claimed nearly 400 members of Congress violated their oaths of office by not investigating claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election and voting to certify Joe Biden’s win.
Raland Brunson, the lead plaintiff in the suit, along with brothers Loy and Deron, asked for those members of Congress, along with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, to be removed from office and barred from ever running again. Similarly, former Vice President Mike Pence would also be banned from holding another elective office.
In an order published Monday, the Supreme Court said it would not hear the Utahn’s case.
On Friday, a small group of Bronson’s supporters met outside the Supreme Court in hopes of encouraging justices to hear their arguments.
The suit also ignored the order of presidential succession laid out in the Constitution by asking that Donald Trump be made eligible to return to the White House.
According to Deron Brunson, lawmakers’ refusal to look into election fraud claims was akin to treason and an “act of war” against the United States. No credible evidence has been presented of widespread fraud during the 2020 presidential election or that it impacted the outcome.
The suit also asked for more than $2.9 billion in damages that the court make that payout tax-free.
The Brunsons did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the ruling.
On social media, Raland Brunson set the stage for Monday’s denial. “Don’t think for a second that my brothers and I are not prepared for denial. We’ve got plenty of chess pieces still at play and we still have our queen,” he wrote on his Facebook page.
Following Monday’s decision, Raland expressed disappointment on Facebook but said they planned to ask the court to reconsider.
The case was initially dismissed by a federal judge for lack of standing. The brothers appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals but were denied, leading to Monday’s denial by the Supreme Court.
Several media figures on the far right were hyping the case in the days leading up to Monday’s decision, including some prominent influencers in the QAnon conspiracy theory movement. >

The podcast Opening Arguments did a break down of why this case is total bullshit if anyone cares to listen. They break it down in easy to understand terms. Epidsode # 668. Episode is even done to appeal to those who may be inclined to believe this case has merit. >

Going out on limb to guess it got thrown out because this...

nearly 400 members of Congress violated their oaths of office by not investigating claims of voter fraud

...is not at all how it's supposed to work anyway? That's not the job of Congress, that's for the DoJ and FBI to do.
Really hope they get some frivolous-lawsuit charges for filing over a question which could have been answered with a 2-minute Google. >

The Q boards are on fire after this. They say the next step is an appeal to a military tribunal lol. And if the military doesn’t step in, it’s militia time.  That a time to be alive >

i bet they emboldened by brasil too >

And who funded this boondoggle? >

Exactly. >

Their lawyers need to be disbarred. >

Iirc, they were pro se - they represented themselves. >

They should be charged with wasting the Courts time when.. >

Does any of those 400 include the ones that were elected on the same ballot Trump lost on or do they conveniently skip over that fact like every other Republican? >

Oh it most certainly does include Republicans who beat Democrats, but voted for Biden or didn't vote for President at all.
I've asked the same thing in AskTrumpSupporters but have never gotten an honest reply. >

Full text since it's behind a paywall:  

Supreme Court rejects Utah brothers’ lawsuit seeking to return Donald Trump to the White House
By Bryan Schott  | Jan. 9, 2023, 5:05 p.m.
The lawsuit said nearly 400 members of Congress should be removed from office for failing to investigate claims of fraud in the 2020 election
(Jose Luis Magana | AP) The U.S. Supreme Court is seen early Tuesday, May 3, 2022 in Washington. The Supreme Court, on Monday, Jan. 9, 2023, rejected a lawsuit brought by three Utah brothers seeking to return Donald Trump to the White House.
Three Utah brothers seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election and return Donald Trump to the White House will not have their longshot lawsuit heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The litigation, Brunson v. Adams et. al., claimed nearly 400 members of Congress violated their oaths of office by not investigating claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election and voting to certify Joe Biden’s win.
Raland Brunson, the lead plaintiff in the suit, along with brothers Loy and Deron, asked for those members of Congress, along with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, to be removed from office and barred from ever running again. Similarly, former Vice President Mike Pence would also be banned from holding another elective office.
In an order published Monday, the Supreme Court said it would not hear the Utahn’s case.
On Friday, a small group of Bronson’s supporters met outside the Supreme Court in hopes of encouraging justices to hear their arguments.
The suit also ignored the order of presidential succession laid out in the Constitution by asking that Donald Trump be made eligible to return to the White House.
According to Deron Brunson, lawmakers’ refusal to look into election fraud claims was akin to treason and an “act of war” against the United States. No credible evidence has been presented of widespread fraud during the 2020 presidential election or that it impacted the outcome.
The suit also asked for more than $2.9 billion in damages that the court make that payout tax-free.
The Brunsons did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the ruling.
On social media, Raland Brunson set the stage for Monday’s denial. “Don’t think for a second that my brothers and I are not prepared for denial. We’ve got plenty of chess pieces still at play and we still have our queen,” he wrote on his Facebook page.
Following Monday’s decision, Raland expressed disappointment on Facebook but said they planned to ask the court to reconsider.
The case was initially dismissed by a federal judge for lack of standing. The brothers appealed the decision to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals but were denied, leading to Monday’s denial by the Supreme Court.
Several media figures on the far right were hyping the case in the days leading up to Monday’s decision, including some prominent influencers in the QAnon conspiracy theory movement. >

How does such a frivolous lawsuit make it all the way to the Supreme Court? >

It didn't. 
It was rejected at the trial court level. They appealed that dismissal to the appeals court, which then rejected the appeal. They appealed that to the Supreme and the Supreme rejected it again. It didn't "make it" to anywhere. >

They appealed that to the Supreme and the Supreme rejected it again.
So…it made it all the way to the Supreme Court.  It never even should have made it that far through the appeals process is the point…it should have been laughed away on day one. >

The supreme court declined to hear the case, meaning the decision by the appellate court stands.
Taking away someone's right to an appeal is a pretty bad precedent, I would advise against it. >

Taking away someone’s right to an appeal is a pretty bad precedent, I would advise against it.
Letting every single batshit crazy lawsuit make it all the way up the appeals process to the Supreme Court is an even worse precedent.  I would definitely advise against it. >

What we should do is have people who judge whether a lawsuit is worth pursuing or not, and then if people think they made a bad call, someone can take the judgment of that person to a panel of 3 more people with more experience, who can judge whether the first person's judgments were right or wrong, and either allow the case to continue or keep it shut down.
We could even have a panel of 9 people, who have super good judgment to make sure that even those middle people who are making judgment calls do the right thing.  We can call them the supreme judgment people.
I like this system.  I think I will call it the "super awesome people figuring out laws and rules system."  Or maybe the "justice system* I don't know it's still a work in progress. >

That’s great.  Glad you think the judges have plenty of time to consider every single bat shit crazy course case in the entire country.
And apparently the bat-shit crazier the case, the more important it is that it makes it all the way up to the Supreme Court.
So according to you, since my local judge refused to throw out my parking ticket, I should just appeal it up to the Supreme Court.  Since they’ve got plenty of time on their hands, and they’re the ultimate court in this “super awesome” system of yours. >

You realize that people have to pay for an appeal, right? And that money goes towards the judges' pay?  If you want to appeal a traffic ticket be my guest, it's your money.  But there is a reason why the courts function the way they do and it is to provide a system to address issues with the law.  I like being able to appeal a trial court judge's decision to include/exclude a witness or to improperly hear/dismiss a case, because it provides clear resolution and avoids fascism by a single panel/person at one level of the court system.
The Supreme Court gets about 7000 applications for "cert" each year, and they have whole staffs of people dedicated to handling them.  This case would have been a 5-10 minute thing as well, as there was no federal question or circuit split at issue, so it really didn't eat into their available time.  This is literally why we have judges and justices, I don't mind having them do their jobs. >

But there is a reason why the courts function the way they do
Kinda getting the sense you don’t really understand how courts function the way they do.   Unless you’re implying $$$$ is what makes the courts go round. >

Well, we pay the judges...so yes? >

But its not a cult.  /s >

I listened to a podcast about this. It’s an absolutely batshit lawsuit, filled with zero facts or evidence.. of course it was thrown out.
But how batshit was it? Aside from demanding 45 be placed back in office immediately they were seeking damages of 2.9 TRILLION DOLLARS, and I shit you not not explicitly said they want it “tax free” >

Justice Thomas was obviously not the one to get this petition… >

I have a feeling their family tree looks like a wreath.. >

I suspect it’s the Utah Supreme Court, not SCOTUS but the page is Paywalled for me. >

This was that Brunson V Adams some of the Q/MAGA crowd have been shouting about. So yeah, US Supreme Court, not just Utah. 
They didn’t understand how the SC works and assumed that because it was on for review to decide to take it or not, that it would be decided on Jan 6th and Trump would be President again. 
Another big fat L for those crazy people. >

Hold on. Are you saying Right Wing Freedom Fighters don’t understand how government or laws work? That can’t be right. >

After all they all "do the research"... >

Perhaps they will storm the Supreme Court and do mock trial and shit... >

Next up, trial of century involving milk and a cookie! >

People vs Santa Claus for theft of milk and cookies >

I wonder how each Justice voted??? >

They didn't. They just had their lowest-level intern scrawl "FUCK NO!" on the first page and throw it out the window. >

How did it get to the Supreme Court? >

Was dismissed due to lack of standing then refused at every other level they appealed at. This was the last possible appeal and the USSC refused to hear it. >

"No credible evidence has been presented of widespread fraud during the 2020 presidential election or that it impacted the outcome."
So basically just like every single other case involving claims of election fraud. >

Paywall. >

And yet there is not enough money for useful things in this country... >

And we are all dumber now for having to read this. >

Makes sense every lower court refused to hear the case, so of course, SCOTUS will take it up.   /s. >

The qultists aren't too happy about this
You love to see it >

Yet another L >

Lawsuit written with crayons? >

Saturday I got hotheaded with the owner of the shop I manage over this moronic lawsuit. I don't get how such a brilliant man can fall for this crap or even hope on it. He' response was what's wrong with asking the question... Um, read the Constitution and you'll know why it's dumb af to ask the question. >

Can't get passed the paywall. Why did this suit even get to SCOTUS? Does that mean I can sue in  the Court anytime I want? >

Their conservatives are dense. >

I wonder how many years more will we hear about this nonsense. Give it up, Republicans. He lost. Bigly. >

How does something like this make it that far ? >

It’s mind boggling to realize that in order to be considered for the Federal Supreme Court it has to have gone through all the other lower courts including the state Supreme Court.
All those courts and judges are willing to do away with the will of the people and the democratic process. Remember that. >


in order to be considered for the Federal Supreme Court it has to have gone through all the other lower courts including the state Supreme Court.

Not true - federal issues (like this one) go through the federal court system. And if you read the article, this case "went through" the federal court system as follows: Federal Court case denied for lack of standing, Appeals Court refused to hear the case, Supreme Court refused to hear the case. So they literally (and rightfully) never had a day in court. >

How did this even make it to the Supreme Court? >

How did this case make it to the supreme court? Like wtf >

How the hell did this trite even make it that far?? >

I'm starting to think Donald Trump will never win the 2020 election >

Im still in utter shock that JFK Jr didn’t return from dead and help king clown back into office. How could that be wrong? It seems so rational. >

“It’s gonna happen, these things take time. You just wait!” - my QAnon friend, who has discovered infinite patience he never knew he had before. Though, it’s not really patience I suppose; it’s more like the parent jingling keys in front of the baby to make it forget why it’s crying. “Hey, why didn’t that 100% certain prediction come true?” “Don’t worry, it will, but have you heard about this thing you need to be angry about?!? It’s shocking!! Get angry!!!” >

I know. They said nothing could stop the storm. But remember these are the same people who have been waiting over 2000 years for the return of the dude who was supposed to come back 2000 years ago