BREAKING: Supreme Court Advances Lawsuit to NULLIFY 2016 Election

Think about it though. If found true, this is bigger than Watergate. Congress will appear to be the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) of the world for not impeaching an illegal president, and that cloud over the party will be permanent. And if that is fine with Trump supporters, we will have entered into unchartered waters. Now they will need to decide if lawlessness with our government is the road they prefer most traveled?

 

Putting more LOLs doesn't add the non-existent content of your post.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!

 

Leftists believe the courts have the power to do anything they want.

 

This reminds me of one of those juvenile Trump tweets.

 

^^^ you're serious aren't you?

that's scary, you people on the left have turned into paranoid, tin foil hat, non stop whining children,
I'm afraid for you, live your life, trump won, it's over.. sit back and watch America become Great Again, it could be theraputic

- - - Updated - - -

let me guess, you check under your bed for Russians before you go to sleep at night

LOLOLOLO

- - - Updated - - -

 

Except Lynch didn't on purpose meet with Clinton like Sessions. And the information passed was going to be public information anyway. However, I agree, it was bad judgment on her part.

 

As long as we have your non-existent counter arguments to the facts, what's under my bed will remain squeaky clean.

 

NO, admitted no such thing, I quite clearly stated "IF it was manufactured" it was manufactured by Obama and his literary agents. And claiming it was a mistake isn't handing anybody anything.

 

I may be from California, but SHOW ME

This links to the supreme court.

Show they even have such a case.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/

 

What would make him illegal? You need a law to make something illegal.
If Russia is the source of the leaks, they did nothing other than reveal the truth. Voters knowing the truth doesn't make an election illegal. Makes it a more informed choice.

 

They leaked evidence?

 

Cross check proved the election was illegally stolen. And what truth are you talking about?

 

Oooook but you still need a law that makes it illegal. YOUR proclamations that it is illegal are meaningless.

The truth revealed in the leaks of emails of course. .

 

Actually, the conversation was between Clinton and Lynch alone. No record of the meeting was made or made public. But for a reporter seeing them, we likely never would have known.

 

Your gut reaction that Trump is a lawless president is light years away for SCOTUS or rationale opinion giving it second thought.

 

That is undeniably true. I was commenting from a constitutional context which has no relevance to leftist politics.

 

Bla. Bla. Bla. Bla.

 

What a helpless lot of Right-wingers. Bury them with the truth, and they come out of it acting like children.

 

He's already been proven lawless. Remember Trump University? My gut reaction has long been proven right.

 

The DNC got busted sharing debate questions, colluding with media, illegally communicating with PACs, hiring protesters to disrupt events, hiring people to spread fake news about Trump and attack real news about Hillary all over social media, and on, and on, and on.

And to Leftists, this somehow means the SCOTUS can invalidate a lawful and ratified election hahah.

 

You got duped by an anonymous kook blog. Look how they hide their identity. Would you buy a car from a lot where everyone wore rubber masks? Yet you are willing to accept information from one that claims their story is true.

This is where the concept of fake news comes from.

 

The Petition only seeks to have the Election declared "unconstitutional," so that new Election can be held. I don't see how the Supreme Court could rule outside of the relief sought by the petitioners, but then Chief Justice Roberts did declare that the ACA mandate was a tax, so who knows?

 

Congress may hold investigations for anything in its purview that falls under "oversight." It's part of the system of Checks & Balances. Requiring Congress to have probable cause defeats the purpose of exercising oversight of federal agencies and elected/appointed officials.

 

Actually it was "manufactured" by the Skankipotumus's campaign team. Just admit that and we can move on.

 

Well, that's one of the issues raised in the Petition.

There is the 12th Amendment, which provides for a peaceful transition of power. The Petition alleges there was no peaceful transition of power, since the Guaranty Clause (Article IV Section 4) of the Constitution was violated. The Guaranty Clause states:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

The Petition claims that Russian hacking rises to the level of an "invasion." ..

Does the Supreme Court have authority to deploy its powers of judicial review to determine if a federal election rises to the standards set forth in the Constitution?

My guess is that at least four of the Justices (Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy and Roberts) will say the Supreme Court does have the authority to review an election. You can probably add Sotomayor and Kagan to the list as well.

Don't forget that Bush v Gore opened the door to judicial review of elections by the Supreme Court.