I meant that someone could read it wrong... It says that the case reached the SC. Someone could read that as the case was accepted by the SC.

We are on season 2

Pre election then post election

I think I see what you're getting at, is there a difference between it being on the docket and them choosing to accept reviewing it?

Or maybe season one was the impeachment, season 2 is the election, season 3 is 2021 results and the the kraken folk vs the GOP

I dont get it having to wear a mask is supposed to be like martial law then you lose election and it's literally roll out the tanks

Yes... Only a small percentage of cases filed in the SC are heard by the SC, as I understand it... They get to choose the cases they think warrant their evaluation.

I think PA state congress would do the deed if they could the other ones seem less keen

At this point it's hard to rule what can or cannot happen

members of Arizona, Penn, and Georgia state Republicans have called for special sessions

Georgia trying to get Kemp to hand over electors while crying for his head 🤣

Uh huh, hilarious

It's just a rock solid argument to give him we blame you for Trump getting less votes and not cheating enough

You mentioned something earlier about layers of security to ensure election integrity, can you elaborate more on that

Now help us break the country

Michigan they are like the potus convinced us to kidnap you so wanna help him take an election you want another 4 years of that right

hmmm... interesting. Was contacted about a job as a remote C++ software engineer.

I really should check my email and LinkedIn more often

This guy is the new grifter on the block , look at his over sensationalist declaratory titles. Then you watch it and it’s as empty as can be. Tim pool business model works.

Easy money

Ah yes, the grifting model of bringing on people that literally hate you and think you're a grifter onto your podcast.

That’s only recently

The short 3:36 minute video in case anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWttaCWgmns

Vausch and destiny vs years of everything else @Maw

@Bey I just posted that as the new grifter on the block

Yeah, all I seen was a static jpg, not the video

@Maw also Tim pools fans don’t care who he brings on. They are locked in

I wouldn't paint people with such a broad brush.

I sat through about 45 seconds then closed the tab... all I heard was, "*blah blah blah blah blah blah*..."

With the will he won’t he thing he had going to the future slide down to more mainstream conservatism

Lots of Tim's viewer base disagrees with him on key points.

Yes the hard right

wat

No, your average conservative.

Not even conservative, just center-right people.

It’s either centrist right or hard right that watch his stuff. The hard right hate watches

According to what?

You?

According to the comments

Even if PA legislature decided to throw out the vote of the people, I have heard conflicting opinions as to whether it could be vetoed by the Governor. This just made me think of something else... The idea has been put forward that because the US Constitution gives the states' legislatures control over deciding the slate of electors that this exclusive authority could mean that the governor cannot impeded them. So, this means that if the state's constitution gives the governor the right to veto legislation, the state's constitution would be subordinate to the Article 2 powers given the legislature. If this is true, wouldn't the PA legislature have the authority to enact any law governing the election regardless of the PA constitution? Just a thought...

If the legislature attempted to overturn a successfully certified election, it could possibly be challenged, because the US Constitution says that state legislatures are to specify the *manner* that the electors are chosen - and that has to occur on the day the the US Congress specifies (11/3 this year). Once they establish the manner (popular vote) and the day has passed, the only way they have any more say is if it ends in a "failed" election. It's pretty vague. A couple of Textualist articles I've read indicated that this means that the manner that they prescribed "failed". In all of these states, the process has run the course and the elections have been certified as prescribed by law. Which would preclude them from asserting that the election is failed. There are some folks that think there are some cases that could be construed as saying that the legislature can decide to intervene at any time.

I like thought experiments...

Comments are hardly a judge of demographics.

You really think Tim pool isn’t a grifter have at it @Maw I’m not gonna try and convince you

Naw, I don't.

Same with the finance hub guy

Ok

Candance Owens ,Tim pool , Dave Rubin . Understand the conservative market well and just play into it.

Cool.

Hence why they are prone to the more cult like mentality as I explained the other day

Must be nice to completely dismiss people because you just presume they're grifting.

I watch his videos

I listen for language and emphasis and it’s all marketing to one group , there is no consistency of outrage

It’s clear as day

All this tech experts. All happened to be ex military and government employees... im guessing it give them more validity to their words. Than mark Mark Zuckerberg or the smartest guy in MIT and Harvard

Good for him

Make that cash

Trump does it

"Clear as day."

K bud

He clickbaits his videos for sure.

But that's like, something everyone does.

The idea that he's portraying to be something he's not though is kinda amusing, not going to lie.

That’s not the only kind of grifting.

You could have no real personal stake but still thrown in your own personality every now and again

Barr is gonna get canned next 😅

But if you don’t see it you don’t see it

Oh, so we're diluting the term 'grifter' now as well.

No

There is no diluting of the term

You are.

No

The idea of being a grifter came from being a swindler.

A con-man.

You can have different gradients of personal beliefs and still play to a crowd

So are you claiming that you know what Tim Pool is thinking?

A party must petition the SCOTUS to issue a Writ of Certiorari.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1

I am claiming he is inconsistent in his outrage and only slants right and makes excuses for them. He markets to them because he knows that base well

And that pays well so why change

... sounds like you're describing being a partisan.

Where is the grifting coming into the picture?

Like I said if you want to live in a fantasy that you just take people at their word fine

Because you **think** he doesn't hold these views?

By that same measure, Pakman and Destiny are grifters as well.

it’s because he is inconsistent with his stated views

How so?

What he believes is irrelevant, for example he will take a particular action on the left and give reasons for not liking it but then never addressing it if it happens on the right. He knows if he ever takes a critical angle of the right he would lose support

It’s not a hard business model to follow

That's literally being a partisan.

How do you know what he believes?

Not a grifter.

While claiming not to be @Maw

What he believes and presents are completely relative.

If you're going to call someone a grifter.

He reads the daily mail articles and just supports everything it says without being critical of it

He doesn't care about catering to his base, his base comes to him. He's invited dozens of people who disagree with him on his podcast.

... aka, he's partisan.

He knows his audience just agree with them and they will give you money

Someone who caters to their base, doesn't do that

@Maw he claims not to be

So? He's wrong. Plain and simple.

That's like saying Joe Rogan is a grifter 🤣