[y04185]

Under what circumstances? Please elaborate.

Read the dissent.

[oldsport]

Under what circumstances? Please elaborate.

Read the dissent.

Y, these IDIOTS are warped. Thomas' dissenting was correct. No state judge or court had the authority to usurp the Pennsylvania legislative authority let alone the law to establish the conduct of elections and the establishment of election law.

[CU1994]

No. If he is right, you should be able to articulate why. I am going to go out on a limb and assume you can't because he is full of s**t.

[Wildman78]

I read the dissent. The issue was whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded its authority by upholding extending the deadline to collect mail-in ballots by 3 days after the election. (Remember that whole Post Office Delay thing).

I'll let y04185 explain why he thinks Thomas was right about the Court taking the case.


Keep in mind Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh and the newest Justice, Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with Justice Thomas.

[oldsport]

I read the dissent. The issue was whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded its authority by upholding extending the deadline to collect mail-in ballots by 3 days after the election. (Remember that whole Post Office Delay thing).

I'll let y04185 explain why he thinks Thomas was right about the Court taking the case.


Keep in mind Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh and the newest Justice, Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with Justice Thomas.

So what? You GD IDIOT.

[Wildman78]

So what? You GD IDIOT.

Look I'm not a GD Idiot. Would you please grow up.  You are an embarrassment to your Kappa Alpha Psi and Morgan State.

So What? Three of his conservatives took a pass on hearing the case. Maybe his reasons for hearing the case aren't very strong at all.

Of course, you are free to articulate why you think his argument has merit.

[CU1994]

So what? You GD IDIOT.

Look I'm not a GD Idiot. Would you please grow up.  You are an embarrassment to your Kappa Alpha Psi and Morgan State.

So What? Three of his conservatives took a pass on hearing the case. Maybe his reasons for hearing the case aren't very strong at all.

Of course, you are free to articulate why you think his argument has merit.

Trump will go a week without telling a lie before you get OS or Y to articulate their point.

[iceman4221]

Trump will go a week without telling a lie before you get OS or Y to articulate their point.

[y04185]

I read the dissent. The issue was whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded its authority by upholding extending the deadline to collect mail-in ballots by 3 days after the election. (Remember that whole Post Office Delay thing).

I'll let y04185 explain why he thinks Thomas was right about the Court taking the case.


Keep in mind Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh and the newest Justice, Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with Justice Thomas.

What The United States Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is stating that down the road Republicans can do the same thing that democrats did in Pennsylvania.  Remember when democrats passed the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes.  Republicans cried foul.  Then, when the GOP had the votes they flaunted it in the democrat's face. 

He's warned you people. 

[FunCkMaster]

I just can’t with this dude. He is a straight up clown.

Dissent by Justice Thomas in election case draws fire for revisiting baseless Trump fraud claims

https://www.yahoo.com/news/dissent-justice-thomas-election-case-223407739.html

And you are a f....ing IDIOT.

Him mad.

[CU1994]

I read the dissent. The issue was whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded its authority by upholding extending the deadline to collect mail-in ballots by 3 days after the election. (Remember that whole Post Office Delay thing).

I'll let y04185 explain why he thinks Thomas was right about the Court taking the case.


Keep in mind Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh and the newest Justice, Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with Justice Thomas.

What The United States Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is stating that down the road Republicans can do the same thing that democrats did in Pennsylvania.  Remember when democrats passed the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes.  Republicans cried foul.  Then, when the GOP had the votes they flaunted it in the democrat's face. 

He's warned you people.

Please decipher what you said. What did democrats do in PA that was wrong. Before you answer, know that I live PA and know that republicans filed a lawsuit against changes they voted for. So again, what did democrats do that was wrong?

[Wildman78]

What The United States Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is stating that down the road Republicans can do the same thing that democrats did in Pennsylvania.  Remember when democrats passed the filibuster rule requiring 60 votes.  Republicans cried foul.  Then, when the GOP had the votes they flaunted it in the democrat's face. 

He's warned you people.

I don't think you read the dissent. I think you are shooting from the hip. If you did read the dissent, it doesn't appear that you understood it very well.

Here's the dissent

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-542_2c83.pdf

[CU1994]

Notice he said the same thing he did in his precious post with more words. Still waiting for him to articulate his point.

[cee dog]

Klarance Koon Kthomas is the worst black skin person on earth. He has done more damage than a gangbanger and crack dealer.

[iceman4221]

I read the dissent. The issue was whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court exceeded its authority by upholding extending the deadline to collect mail-in ballots by 3 days after the election. (Remember that whole Post Office Delay thing).

I'll let y04185 explain why he thinks Thomas was right about the Court taking the case.

Keep in mind Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Kavanaugh and the newest Justice, Amy Coney Barrett disagreed with Justice Thomas.

So what? You GD IDIOT.

Levels of Engagement when Debating a Topic...

Note: Name Calling is at the Bottom of the "Thought Spectrum"...

Critical thinking and/or common sense tells us "no brains" are required to resort to name calling - even a scare crow can do that...