So lawyers in some Republican States get to invalidate votes in States that voted for Joe B. ?

Interesting. Good luck with that. Let us just see how it works out in court shall we?

180.... here... comes "President Elect Harris"

Oh dear, Trump and Texas (+) crash and burn in Trump’s stuffed SCOTUS and so Trump is a loser yet again. So sayeth the evil BBC this morning, who I’m informed here lie with their ill gotten license fee money. Who to believe?

Well, AK, given that SCOTUS has a 5-2 Republican-appointed majority, surely even the die-hard allegers of fraud must admit there's nothing in it now?

Even if there was fraud (and to a certain extent there always is), Trump would need to provide cast iron evidence that it was a significant size, across multiple states. The claim of voter fraud is not new and Trump had the opportunity to do something about it.

I suspect that had covid not happened, he might have comfortably won a second term but the more he talked, the lower his chances got. Had he shown reasonable concern and let others speak for him, covid would not have been his downfall. He didn't need to do what Europe has but making the right noises about taking care and considering others might have made all the difference.

That really didn't take long at all ...

"The State of Texas's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution. Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot."

IANAL but they seem to be saying that the state of Texas has no legal right even to bring the case, regardless of its merits.

In a statement accompanying the order, Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas said they would have allowed the case to be filed, but would grant no other relief.

So two Justices would have heard the case but would have not granted any of the remedies being sought. This ruling closes the door against any similar future cases.

So the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security and now the hand-picked Justices at the Supreme Court find no merit in claims that the election was stolen or rigged.

Trump, however, fights on.

So, you’re the President of the United States, and you just went through an election where you got more votes than any sitting President in history, by far - and purportedly lost. You can’t get “standing” before the Supreme Court, so you “intervene” with wonderful states that, after careful study and consideration, think you got “screwed”, something which will hurt them also. Many others likewise join the suit but, within a flash, it is thrown out and gone, without even looking at the many reasons it was brought. A Rigged Election, fight on!

What an illiterate clown. 39 days and counting.

Certain symmetry there. Towards the beginning of his interest in politics Trump called for a group of Black and Hispanic teenagers to be put to death even after DNA evidence had proved them innocent of rape. As his term nears its end the Trump Administration rushes through the execution of two black men with two more to come.

"I just don't see what the FBI failed to do, they are executing their role perfectly.
There is no legal standard in elections, whoever cheats the most wins, states that follow the law are disenfranchised.
The FBI are expert at air tight, no media leaks during operations to hide witnesses and grant immunity to conspirators with a "D" by their name and very good at protecting their own from consequences of illegal activity if you have an "R" by your name.
What gives? The FBI didn't know about the rampant corrupt activity with Bidens already and likely dozens of others ?
This "scandal" is the beginning of removing Biden from the scene and installing Harris as president. Joe has outlived his usefulness and the dementia cannot be hidden by the drugs much longer.
The Supreme Court justices are paid off, out of the way already.
The DOJ regularly interferes in elections, the bureaucracies select the leaders, elections are theatrical circus acts."

AK,

"Oh dear, Trump and Texas (+) crash and burn in Trump’s stuffed SCOTUS and so Trump is a loser yet again. So sayeth the evil BBC this morning, who I’m informed here lie with their ill gotten license fee money. Who to believe?"

So Biden or Harris. Both on the CCP payroll, as are many more in DC. Clear that you find this amusing. You may have a different view in 4 years.

Mark Hodgson,

"Well, AK, given that SCOTUS has a 5-2 Republican-appointed majority, surely even the die-hard allegers of fraud must admit there's nothing in it now?"

Has any US court examined the evidence? None of them have the stones to do so. Being Republican-appointed doesn't mean you have a backbone.

TinyCO2,

"Even if there was fraud (and to a certain extent there always is), Trump would need to provide cast iron evidence that it was a significant size, across multiple states. The claim of voter fraud is not new and Trump had the opportunity to do something about it."

First, fraud should be investigated, whether or not it is "significant". Second, the courts are not even looking at the evidence. And what can Trump do, with the DOJ and the FBI turning a blind eye? Serious question.

"This epic election con isn’t a matter of shrugging and saying, “Ah, shucks, we’ll just get ‘em next time.” It’s nearly a cliché, but if Democrats and their sinister allies get away with this theft, there will be no next time. The conspirators will act diligently to consolidate their gains and institutionalize and refine the means of stealing future elections. This elections theft is no outlier. If we naively -- or fearfully -- treat this heist as such, we will consign future elections to banana republic farces. Only a fool would then slap an “I voted today” sticker on his shirt and mean it as anything more than a woeful, wry joke."

Whatever happens, 2021 will be violent. The CCP is delighted. Strange that some on this blog are too.

( Phil Clarke not included, of course. )

Charly, sorry, you're scraping the barrel now. The US' most important Court, charged with supervising (among other things) the administration of the US constitution, has found the claim before it to be devoid of merit. If there was even the slightest hint of a legal argument, do you seriously think 5 Republican-appointed judges wouldn't have said something like "OK< this is interesting, we need to look at this and hear detailed argument"?

RR,

In their first hours with police, the young men offered a mix of confessions. The details from each did not align with the accounts from the others. They identified different individuals who actually committed the rape. They did not agree on where the attack took place. Their statements failed to match the physical evidence from the scene, including the woman’s clothing. Importantly, none of them confessed to the rape itself.

They soon retracted their confessions.

The incident was front page news and fraught with racial overtones. The victim was white. The suspects were black and Hispanic. News coverage referred to "wilding teens" marauding at will.

Within a few days, authorities had charged the five teens with rape and attempted murder.

Soon after that, on May 1, Trump paid $85,000 for full-page ads in New York’s four major newspapers, the New York Times, the Daily News, the New York Post and New York Newsday.

''Bring Back the Death Penalty. Bring Back Our Police!" the ad’s headline said (see page 13).

"I want to hate these muggers and murderers," Trump wrote. "They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes."

(My bold).

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jun/24/donald-trump/donald-trump-twists-story-central-park-five/

"And what can Trump do, with the DOJ and the FBI turning a blind eye? Serious question." Charly

Nothing other than look like a sore loser. Nobody is going to overturn the result now. I was serious about him had his chance to make a difference. There was talk about voter fraud at the previous election. Why didn't he do something about it? The US certainly looked like a developing country because it took so long to do the count.

One of his claims that he must have won is becuase he got more votes - not a logical argument. There was a greater turnout and even though he got more votes than last time, Biden got a bigger increase in votes over Hilliary. Trump only narrowly beat her. If covid hadn't happened he'd have romped home but he came across as a boob. Biden may be even worse but he wasn't in the hot seat.

https://twitter.com/JPMediaBoss/status/1326360346617995265?s=19

"However, when it comes to the citizen’s right to make sure his or her vote counts and is not nullified by corrupt and dishonest practices, the courts have decided that it is imperative they restrain themselves from taking a position on the merits.

They have thoughtfully informed us of constraints on them that no-one knew existed. The Friday ruling cites only a conclusion, but no reasoning.

If a state sues, is it not representing its citizens? Isn’t that, at the root, the only function of a state government? Are the citizens’ rights to an honest vote not affected if another state runs a bogus election and the first state’s votes become nullified?

Does a state not have standing to sue because the court anticipates it will not succeed on the merits? Why do courts ever bother to write legal opinions when they can save time and tell us the outcome they have in mind right away?"