User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/7/2020 7:58:12 PM EDT
Some here believe SCOTUS won't lift a finger in this shot show of an election.
Some do We ALL can agree that that are our final stand in the political fight for Liberty in this Election. So, ARFCOM... It is time to melt some phone lines.  Attached FileI do not care if you can't be bothered. This is not the thread for you. Grow a spine. For the rest of us, our mission is this. Call every day. Call multiple times a day. Apply Pressure. Flood them with letters. I start tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2020 8:50:03 PM EDT
[#1]
Don’t think that’s how the Supreme Court works.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2020 8:56:58 PM EDT
[#2]
FPNI
This isn’t some 700 Club telethon, OP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2020 10:01:19 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FPNI This isn't some 700 Club telethon, OP. Stop trusting the system and fight |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2020 10:09:54 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don’t think that’s how the Supreme Court works. FPNI |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2020 10:19:35 PM EDT
[#5]
Yeah, let's all do this! Ima call 'em and tell 'em I'm from Arf and I'm never voting for any of 'em again if they don't do this! They'll be impressed!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 3:41:14 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, let's all do this! Ima call 'em and tell 'em I'm from Arf and I'm never voting for any of 'em again if they don't do this! They'll be impressed! the Pa response that was just published is exactly that in reverse. A threat of "you will be smeared as attacking the republic if you do not bow to us" So why did I call? To tell them that The only segment of the American people that actually support them, are watching. If we do not do this, we DESERVE any and all that happens to us next. to put up, or fuck off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 4:36:22 PM EDT
[#7]
bump
do it, or bow down and lick the feet that kick you in your slavery |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 4:43:12 PM EDT
[#8]
message?
want to ensure I'm on topic. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 5:05:06 PM EDT
[#9]
NEVER SAW THIS THREAD.
No idea how I missed it. They have heard from me, a few times now. One lady in particular is a bitch and does not like what I have to say. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 5:06:38 PM EDT
[#10]
bold title..... heres how, use no spaces at all
[ b ] title [ /b ] |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 5:10:07 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don’t think that’s how the Supreme Court works. FPNI. Such pressure is liable to be counterproductive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 6:25:06 PM EDT
[#12]
It's reasonable to call once and let them know where you stand if that's really important to you.
It's unreasonable to call daily, and to attempt to get others to call daily. If you believe in the rule of law, then then courts should not be swayed by volume of calls. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 6:26:20 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's reasonable to call once and let them know where you stand if that's really important to you. It's unreasonable to call daily, and to attempt to get others to call daily. If you believe in the rule of law, then then courts should not be swayed by volume of calls. Meanwhile they are being swayed by threats of violence that would happen no matter what they did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 6:31:38 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's reasonable to call once and let them know where you stand if that's really important to you. It's unreasonable to call daily, and to attempt to get others to call daily. If you believe in the rule of law, then then courts should not be swayed by volume of calls. If everyone calls once and done, all it takes is that one bitch secretary to tell you off and not report the call to anyone. POOF, it never happened. calling them Daily will piss off that secretary, who will complain to coworkers, who will mention it to other coworkers, who will be overheard by people who will tell the sitting SCOTUS. And thus the signal can't be stopped. WAKE UP. It's not 1998 anymore. The deep state exists even in the ranks of SCOTUS department employees. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 6:34:43 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FPNI. Such pressure is liable to be counterproductive. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Don't think that's how the Supreme Court works. FPNI. Such pressure is liable to be counterproductive. I don't. I will not be silent. I do not trust them. If they are of true integrity, our calling day in and day out will not affect the outcome one way or the other. If the SCOTUS is willing to poke a finger in the eye of 74 million people over a little phone call spam... We were never going to win anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 8:38:35 PM EDT
[#16]
The Left has done this for years, and now it's time for us;
make them stop us |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:05:00 PM EDT
[#17]
 You guys are desperate. Literally one of the reasons they are elected for life is to be politically isolated from the shit you think you are going to accomplish. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:39:41 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You guys are desperate. Literally one of the reasons they are elected for life is to be politically isolated from the shit you think you are going to accomplish. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:42:34 PM EDT
[#19]
don't know if it'll help, but I'm down for a call to let them know we care.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:43:53 PM EDT
[#20]
Didn't some of the Left in congress try to apply this same type of pressure? Writing a letter that told them to do their duty or they'd pack the courts? Judges are not to be swayed by public opinion.....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:45:06 PM EDT
[#21]
No, I'm not harassing the supreme court.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:48:30 PM EDT
[#22]
I believe the that the Supreme Court may accept "Amicus Curiae" briefs...but there are deadlines to file them.
"An amicus curiae (literally, "friend of the court"; plural: amici curiae) is someone who is not a party to a case who assists a court by offering information, expertise, or insight that has a bearing on the issues in the case. The decision on whether to consider an amicus brief lies within the discretion of the court." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amicus_curiae |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:49:16 PM EDT
[#23]
double posted
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:51:42 PM EDT
[#24]
Nope. No way. Not shitposting scotus judges.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 9:57:39 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: NEVER SAW THIS THREAD. No idea how I missed it. They have heard from me, a few times now. One lady in particular is a bitch and does not like what I have to say. I may call tomorrow and ask to speak to the woman that was rude to the man from Texas.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 10:10:55 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your nativity is positively astounding. Sweet! Here's my humble submission. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 10:59:57 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You either believe in the integrity of the SCOTUS judges and trust the system or you don't. It sounds like you don't, and that you fear them enough to want people to keep quiet and pray they do the right thing. I don't. I will not be silent. I do not trust them. If they are of true integrity, our calling day in and day out will not affect the outcome one way or the other. If the SCOTUS is willing to poke a finger in the eye of 74 million people over a little phone call spam... We were never going to win anyway. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Don't think that's how the Supreme Court works. FPNI. Such pressure is liable to be counterproductive. I don't. I will not be silent. I do not trust them. If they are of true integrity, our calling day in and day out will not affect the outcome one way or the other. If the SCOTUS is willing to poke a finger in the eye of 74 million people over a little phone call spam... We were never going to win anyway. Actually, I am a member of the bar of the Supreme Court, and it would be unethical for me to publicly make statements denouncing the integrity of the court. What I meant by my comment is that judges in general and the Supreme Court in particular do not traditionally respond well to threats and pressure, and they consider it unseemly to be lobbied. They are not supposed to be political. They are supposed to call balls and strikes. Suggesting to them that they are acting based on political pressure (whether actually true or not) is liable to be regarded as insulting, and it may push them the other way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2020 11:40:33 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Actually, I am a member of the bar of the Supreme Court, and it would be unethical for me to publicly make statements denouncing the integrity of the court. What I meant by my comment is that judges in general and the Supreme Court in particular do not traditionally respond well to threats and pressure, and they consider it unseemly to be lobbied. They are not supposed to be political. They are supposed to call balls and strikes. Suggesting to them that they are acting based on political pressure (whether actually true or not) is liable to be regarded as insulting, and it may push them the other way. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Don't think that's how the Supreme Court works. FPNI. Such pressure is liable to be counterproductive. I don't. I will not be silent. I do not trust them. If they are of true integrity, our calling day in and day out will not affect the outcome one way or the other. If the SCOTUS is willing to poke a finger in the eye of 74 million people over a little phone call spam... We were never going to win anyway. Actually, I am a member of the bar of the Supreme Court, and it would be unethical for me to publicly make statements denouncing the integrity of the court. What I meant by my comment is that judges in general and the Supreme Court in particular do not traditionally respond well to threats and pressure, and they consider it unseemly to be lobbied. They are not supposed to be political. They are supposed to call balls and strikes. Suggesting to them that they are acting based on political pressure (whether actually true or not) is liable to be regarded as insulting, and it may push them the other way. There is no middle anymore.. the Left decided to start a war.. And if they wanted to call ball's and strikes.. why did the pussy out on the PA Suite, and why is the dissenting opinion on a rather notable 2a case essential "the 2a is not an individual right". You want to know why we are here, "badgering" and "lobbying" them? because they can claim to be non political all they want.. their actions speak otherwise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2020 5:05:47 PM EDT
[#29]
To all you "that's not how it works" people
yes. That's how it worked SCOTUS afraid of riot You and your ilk, who refused to call, are as responsible for what comes next as SCOTUS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2020 5:16:31 PM EDT
[#30]
Ok, but how do we demand that they clarify and enforce meaning of key words that are used through constitution of the states, and even used in their rulings.
Does it always require a lawsuit of 'impacted' parties ? For example, I am sure at least 70 mln people would like them to clarify the meaning of 'popular vote'. They used it in their own ruling (as recent as july of 2020) It certainly does not mean 'unverifiable', 'diluted', 'double-counted'. But there is nothing that seems to have prevented state election officials to choose a 'spectrum' of definitions of such an important concept that's embedded in almost every state's constitution. SCOTUS did not refuse to clarify definitions of marriage, gender, etc. Quote HistoryQuoted: Actually, I am a member of the bar of the Supreme Court, and it would be unethical for me to publicly make statements denouncing the integrity of the court. What I meant by my comment is that judges in general and the Supreme Court in particular do not traditionally respond well to threats and pressure, and they consider it unseemly to be lobbied. They are not supposed to be political. They are supposed to call balls and strikes. Suggesting to them that they are acting based on political pressure (whether actually true or not) is liable to be regarded as insulting, and it may push them the other way. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Don't think that's how the Supreme Court works. FPNI. Such pressure is liable to be counterproductive. I don't. I will not be silent. I do not trust them. If they are of true integrity, our calling day in and day out will not affect the outcome one way or the other. If the SCOTUS is willing to poke a finger in the eye of 74 million people over a little phone call spam... We were never going to win anyway. Actually, I am a member of the bar of the Supreme Court, and it would be unethical for me to publicly make statements denouncing the integrity of the court. What I meant by my comment is that judges in general and the Supreme Court in particular do not traditionally respond well to threats and pressure, and they consider it unseemly to be lobbied. They are not supposed to be political. They are supposed to call balls and strikes. Suggesting to them that they are acting based on political pressure (whether actually true or not) is liable to be regarded as insulting, and it may push them the other way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2020 8:56:20 PM EDT
[#31]
@MikeDeltaFoxtrot
care to share any insights on the Cowardice of the supreme court now? Still think we shouldnt have called? Still think it "doesnt work that way"? you know.. since you claimed to be close to the scotus |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2020 10:04:18 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @MikeDeltaFoxtrot care to share any insights on the Cowardice of the supreme court now? Still think we shouldnt have called? Still think it "doesnt work that way"? you know.. since you claimed to be close to the scotus I think any calls they received likely made it worse, which is to say less likely to take up the case. I never said I was "close," but unlike you, I have some insight into how the federal judiciary works. They did exactly what I predicted they would do. They stayed out of it. If you want to call the court or me names, go for it. I could care less. CLICK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2020 4:33:01 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think any calls they received likely made it worse, which is to say less likely to take up the case. I never said I was "close," but unlike you, I have some insight into how the federal judiciary works. They did exactly what I predicted they would do. They stayed out of it. If you want to call the court or me names, go for it. I could care less. CLICK. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: @MikeDeltaFoxtrot care to share any insights on the Cowardice of the supreme court now? Still think we shouldnt have called? Still think it "doesnt work that way"? you know.. since you claimed to be close to the scotus I think any calls they received likely made it worse, which is to say less likely to take up the case. I never said I was "close," but unlike you, I have some insight into how the federal judiciary works. They did exactly what I predicted they would do. They stayed out of it. If you want to call the court or me names, go for it. I could care less. CLICK. Looks like the judiciary isn't as Isolated from pressure as you think. as for the name calling, please do show a single name called in even remotely your direction in this thread.. I'm not holding my breath considering you to, have taken the "easy" way out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2020 6:50:04 AM EDT
[#34]
Im at the stage where in my personal opinion it appears the only thing that can make a impression on these folks is a mob with a railroad tie ...through town straight to a horse with a rope under the Town halls largest Oak
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
