Political: Cartoons, Memes, Funny Pictures, etc.

[kbaxter60]

And exactly what should they do?

Maybe they should pull a Nike and "just do it"?

Speaker Johnson on Trump Manhattan conviction: ‘Supreme Court should step in’

“People have to believe that justice is fair, that there’s equal justice under the law. They don’t see that right now.”

thepostmillennial.com

 

[General Zod]

Maybe they should pull a Nike and "just do it"?

Speaker Johnson on Trump Manhattan conviction: ‘Supreme Court should step in’

“People have to believe that justice is fair, that there’s equal justice under the law. They don’t see that right now.”

thepostmillennial.com

Except the Supreme Court doesn't "just step in", and we really don't want it getting in the habit of doing so. Judicial tyranny is just as dangerous as political tyranny. Johnson's an idiot for suggesting that they should. Even he admits it's a bad idea, and yet he goes on with it:

"I do believe the Supreme Court should step in," said Johnson on Fox & Friends. "Obviously, this is totally unprecedented, and it's dangerous to our system."

 

[Mike_from_Texas]

How about every day is a day of silence! Sit down and STFU.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Yep, there’s nothing special about anybody. We all come into the world the same and we all leave the same.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[oldag]

I hope the retribution is swift and applied with no quarter

View attachment 455182

Illegals? Maybe.

Democrats? I seriously doubt it.

 

[Iowashooter]

That was part of their defined role. The court didn't "intervene", it granted a stay on a lower court ruling that was brought before the Supreme Court using established protocols.

The Supreme Court has never, ever intervened in a lower court's ruling without a case being brought. Nor should it ever, because it would establish a precedent that a liberal-leaning court could use to destroy civil liberties.

Avenues available for appealing to the Supreme Court​

Prominent lawyer and political commentator Mark Levin has also highlighted the potential for the Supreme Court to rule on Trump's conviction. In his analysis, Levin pointed out that many legal commentators have overlooked the federal avenues available for appealing to the Supreme Court.


"The issue is how to get out of the New York system and bring the case to the Supreme Court, which may or may not take it up," Levin wrote.

Drawing parallels to Bush v Gore, Levin suggested that the Supreme Court might intervene due to the case's implications on the presidential election.

"There was another court involved, the Florida Supreme Court. And it was that court that the Supreme Court believed was violating the Equal Protection Clause," Levin noted, referencing the landmark 2000 case. He suggested that Trump's legal team could argue a similar violation in the current case.

Levin outlined the procedural steps for Trump's legal team to appeal to the Supreme Court, emphasizing the need for an expedited review to ensure the appeal is timely.

He suggested filing applications for common law writs with the Supreme Court, arguing that the harm extends beyond Trump to the federal electoral system and campaign jurisdiction.

 

[cycleguy2300]

I didn’t know this

https://www.facebook.com/stories/16...4EavUyba9keimrLVj8iLQ2sSzqo5A&__tn__=<<,P-y-R

Shane Pruitt​

5h ·
1/3 of the calendar year now is recognized as LGBTQIA+ National holidays!
Bisexual Health Awareness Month (Mar)
National GLBT Health Awareness Week (Last week of Mar)
International Transgender Day of Visibility (Mar 31)
International Asexuality Day (Apr 6)
Day of Silence against LGBTQIA+ bullying (Apr 17)
Nonbinary Parents Day (Apr 18)
Lesbian Visibility Day (Apr 26)
International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (May 17)
Harvey Milk Day (May 22)
Pansexual & Panromantic Awareness & Visibility Day (May 24)
LGBTQIA+Q Pride (Jun)
LGBTQ Families Day (Jun 1)
Pulse Night Remembrance (Jun 12)
Stonewall Riots Anniversary (Jun 27)
Queer Youth of Faith Day (Jun 30)
Nonbinary Awareness Week (Week of Jul 14)
International Drag Day (Jul 16)
Gay Uncles Day (Aug 14)
Celebrate Bisexuality Day (Sep 23)
National Gay Men's HIV/AIDS Awareness Day (Sep 27)
LGBTQIA+Q History Month (Oct)
International Lesbian Day (Oct 8 )
National Coming Out Day (Oct 11)
Spirit Day (Oct 17)
National LGBT Center Awareness Day (Oct 19)
International Pronouns Day (3rd Wed in Oct)
Asexuality Awareness Week (Oct - Nov Dates vary every year)
Intersex Awareness Day (Oct 26)
Transgender Parent Day (1st Sun of Nov)
Transgender Awareness Week (Nov 13-19)
Transgender Day of Remembrance (Nov 20)
World AIDS Day (Dec 1)
Pansexual/Panromantic Pride Day (Dec 8 )
(121 days total)
There isn't a community of people more celebrated by culture right now than those who identify as LGBTQIA+, and yet suicide rates, depression rates, & hopelessness continue to skyrocket.
It's not a lack of celebration and affirmation that is dangerous to people, but rather, the ideology itself.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[General Zod]

Drawing parallels to Bush v Gore, Levin suggested that the Supreme Court might intervene due to the case's implications on the presidential election.​

Text size reduced because damn that's annoying. The quote window made all of the text the same size as the supersized first line.

Again, the court didn't "intervene" of its own accord in 2000 - the Bush campaign filed suit after the Florida Supreme Court ignored the law. The next step up from a state supreme court is SCOTUS, and because it was a national election result the case was expedited. The kangaroo court decision against Trump is not an election result, it's a case that could affect an election (and we agree it's a pretty bald-faced attempt at election interference...but that's not a reason for SCOTUS to throw precedent out the window and go rogue).

Levin outlines (probably with much more thought and detail than the half-assed summary posted wherever you found that article) one strategy for trying to get it before the Supreme Court in a timely manner, but it would be an extraordinary decision for the court to take it up in that manner. The simple fact remains, though, the SCOTUS does not and has not ever looked at a lower court's decision and simply said "no, we don't think so" and reversed the ruling. No matter how egregious.

 

[vmax]

 

[vmax]

 

[vmax]

 

[vmax]

 

[baboon]

 

[baboon]

 

[baboon]

 

[Texasgordo]

 

[crystalphoto]

 

[vmax]

 

[festering]

 

[baboon]

 

[13centkiller]