Justice Clarence Thomas Dissents From Supreme Court On Election Case: 'We Need to Make It Clear'

Careful: Not the MudPit

Link-a-DinkSupre me Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissenting opinion regarding the high court’s decision not to take up a case challenging the Pennsylvania Nov. 3 election results. The court on Monday announced it won’t take up lawsuits challenging a Pennsylvania state court decision that relaxed ballot-integrity measures, including a move to extend the ballot-receipt deadline during the November election by three days due to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus. Former President Donald Trump and Pennsylvania’s GOP urged the court to take up a review of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling.

“This is not a prescription for confidence,” Thomas wrote on Monday, adding that “changing the rules in the middle of the game is bad enough.” Thomas, considered by many to be the most conservative justice, said the court should have granted a review. That decision to rewrite the rules seems to have affected too few ballots to change the outcome of any federal election. But that may not be the case in the future,” Thomas wrote. “These cases provide us with an ideal opportunity to address just what authority nonlegislative officials have to set election rules, and to do so well before the next election cycle. The refusal to do so is inexplicable.”

Thomas also appeared to make a reference to allegations of fraud and irregularities during the Nov. 3 election. “We are fortunate that many of the cases we have seen alleged only improper rule changes, not fraud,” Thomas wrote. “But that observation provides only small comfort. An election free from strong evidence of systemic fraud is not alone sufficient for election confidence. Also important is the assurance that fraud will not go undetected.”

I have to say, I am surprised by the words in the dissent. Doesn't much matter now. It didn't matter from the moment Biden was sworn-in as 46.

a reply to: Snarl

All this means is it goes back to the State level to be addressed. The votes in Pennsylvania that were impacted by the changes weren't counted as per Justice Alito's order and subsequently had no influence on the election outcome. The issue for Republicans is that they didn't take up this case when the changes were made but instead filed them close to Election Day.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

if we promised you nobody is coming to take away your election results, would you be willing to look into things that could harm future elections?

a reply to: network dude

Er, what? No one is being prevented from looking into this, the Supreme Court is basically saying do it at the state level and do it on time instead of sitting on your asses like this case.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
No one is being prevented from looking into this, the Supreme Court is basically saying do it at the state level and do it on time instead of sitting on your asses like this case.

You've been on-point with this crap the whole time. Not hard for me to admit that.

What gives me concern, is that one can't expect a fox to actually guard a henhouse. And that's what we're basically being told is, "Okay."

a reply to: Snarl
The fraud in this election was a bi-partisan effort. The corrupt career republicans wanted Trump out of office as much as the democrats did, showing all of us what we have suspected for decades. When there's a threat to the status quo, both parties will work together to eliminate that threat.

originally posted by: Snarl
What gives me concern, is that one can't expect a fox to actually guard a henhouse. And that's what we're basically being told is, "Okay."

I'm not seeing that, the Supreme Court only said, 'Do it at the State level and do it on time next time'. They didn't say they would never hear a case like this, only that it was half assed.

This isn't going away.

The corruption and fraud is that large.

Thank you Justice Clarence Thomas.

Refusing to hear the case or see the evidence or have people questioned under oath is not proof there was no wrong doing.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Refusing to hear the case or see the evidence...

What 'evidence' did they not agree to see in this case? It was a Constitutional argument, there was no evidence.

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Snarl
The fraud in this election was a bi-partisan effort. The corrupt career republicans wanted Trump out of office as much as the democrats did, showing all of us what we have suspected for decades. When there's a threat to the status quo, both parties will work together to eliminate that threat.

I believe you are spot-on with that observation.

The other stuff that wasn't addressed, like the voting machines having inherent security weaknesses. Again ... no use of voter ID.

I don't wanna give Thomas full credit for saying 'not enough to matter' ... because it has been amply demonstrated from a lot of concerned citizens that there was enough to actually matter (and probably did).

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Snarl
The fraud in this election was a bi-partisan effort. The corrupt career republicans wanted Trump out of office as much as the democrats did, showing all of us what we have suspected for decades. When there's a threat to the status quo, both parties will work together to eliminate that threat.

Establishment Republicans, they no like Trumpism that has enamored more than half the GOP.

So just send it back to the states where the people in charge actually participated in the fraud...yeah, the old "fox taking care of the hen house" situation will surely uncover any wrong doing. smh

originally posted by: Zrtst
So just send it back to the states where the people in charge actually participated in the fraud...yeah, the old "fox taking care of the hen house" situation will surely uncover any wrong doing. smh

What 'wrong doing' took place in the case in question?

a reply to: Snarl

The most flexible, crafty, cunning, party will win in 2022 and 2024.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Snarl

The most flexible, crafty, cunning, party will win in 2022 and 2024.

Hopefully it’s a third party or we’re #ed

a reply to: Snarl

I have to say, I am surprised by the words in the dissent. Doesn't much matter now. It didn't matter from the moment Biden was sworn-in as 46.

Correct and it doesnt matter for elections going forward because now, all the mechanisms for rigging the elections for the Uni-Party are now in place and tacitly approved by the Courts refusal to examine the issue.

The question that keeps coming back to me however is this. Office holders elected by obviously bogus elections. Do they have any legitimate authority? Remember the old analysis of the quantity of "Political Capital" a newly elected POTUS has? Does Biden actually have any political capital?

I cant tell at the moment, but the way things work in typical Bannana Republics is that everyone, including the local agencies and policing authorities and courts know that the "leader" and the Party Parlementarians are fraudulently elected and can be bribed by those having sufficient funds. As a result, that culture of corruption and bribery trickles down even to the local level, courts, magistrates, prison officials, cops and the military. Why? Because everyone knows that the elected officials have no moral authority, much less a moral compass and can safely be imitated in the course of dealing with government.

That level of corruption will soon begin to emerge in the US. And as the Dems imitate their model of Fascist One Party Rule, the Chicoms, they will soon come to realize that the US is suffering the same disability that the Chinese have in their economy, rampant corruption. The Chicoms routinly try to stamp out the corruption at the local levels, but for every rat they kill 3 more pop up to take his/her place.

The reason the Chicoms try to root out corruption is because its EXPENSIVE; it siphons off Bilions from their GDP. The same rot will emerge in the US; it already has in places like Illinois, Michigan and New Jersey. As a result, the GDP of the US economy will be rapidly eroded and the US will be beggard.

The lesson here? Buy Foriegn currency now while you still can.......before the Crims in Charge put in Currency controls. Buy Euro or better yet, Swiss Francs. The dollar will be useless and you wont be able to bribe your way out of trouble or out of the country with US Dollars.

originally posted by: Snarl

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
No one is being prevented from looking into this, the Supreme Court is basically saying do it at the state level and do it on time instead of sitting on your asses like this case.

You've been on-point with this crap the whole time. Not hard for me to admit that.

What gives me concern, is that one can't expect a fox to actually guard a henhouse. And that's what we're basically being told is, "Okay."

I feel like that's racist against foxes. Someone didn't watch Zootopia.

/s

We should make Justice Thomas flags. If nothing else it would bring me satisfaction being called a white supremacist while waving a flag with his face on it.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Zrtst
So just send it back to the states where the people in charge actually participated in the fraud...yeah, the old "fox taking care of the hen house" situation will surely uncover any wrong doing. smh

What 'wrong doing' took place in the case in question?

perhaps if an investigation were to happen, any "wrong doing" might be easier to pinpoint.
A whole lot of citizens of the US feel like something odd happened. We can point to all the things that look strange, but that only get's laughed at by the current cancel culture. But with such a large contingent of people thinking something wrong may have happened, it just seems logical that we would have an investigation look into it. If nothing wrong happened, as you seem to imply, then nothing bad will be found and we will all be able to unite behind our new president.

and none of this would be directed to you had you not been so vocal on this topic.