Fogbow

On Wednesday, during an exclusive interview with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, the election integrity advocate shared with Illinois Review his plan to file a case with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 15th in Washington, DC – hand delivering a case that he says will “secure our election platforms and save our country.”

Lindell, who is on a 3-day tour in Illinois, is making news, explaining, “After three years of hard work, we are finally taking our case to the U.S. Supreme Court. We will not stop until we secure our elections.”

The MyPillow CEO is on a nationwide tour to promote his Election Crime Bureau – an initiative made possible by his significant self-funding and donations to Lindell Offense Fund by others who share his passion for election integrity. To date, Lindell has over 300,000 volunteers, including in Illinois.

Lindell promises that the case that he’s taking to the nation’s highest court will not disappoint, adding that the filing includes “explosive evidence,” and he’s confident that should the court take his case, the ruling will be unanimous.

The MyPillow CEO remains a target of the progressive liberals, and his company has lost over $100 million in sales over the last few years as stores including Walmart, Bed Bath & Beyond and Kohl’s have pulled MyPillow products off the shelves in protest of Lindell’s election integrity initiatives and for his continued support of President Donald Trump.

much ado wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:48 pm So can filing a case directly with the Supreme Court EVER succeed?

much ado wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:48 pm So can filing a case directly with the Supreme Court EVER succeed?

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:56 pm What a puff piece by the Illinois Review.

Chilidog wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:24 pm

On Wednesday, during an exclusive interview with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, the election integrity advocate shared with Illinois Review his plan to file a case with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 15th in Washington, DC – hand delivering a case that he says will “secure our election platforms and save our country.”

https://www.illinoisreview.com/illinois ... html?amp=1

RTH10260 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 6:18 pm

Chilidog wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:24 pm

On Wednesday, during an exclusive interview with MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, the election integrity advocate shared with Illinois Review his plan to file a case with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 15th in Washington, DC – hand delivering a case that he says will “secure our election platforms and save our country.”

https://www.illinoisreview.com/illinois ... html?amp=1

Mike needs to get in touch with Orly Taitz to see how hand delivery to SCOTUS is correctly done

I wonder if he checked on the rules of SCOTUS for the number of copies, the paper size and the colour of the cover sheet required

noblepa wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 9:51 pm Doesn't SCOTUS also require that submissions be printed on an offset press? It is my understanding that you can't simply use MS Word to print off a few copies on your HP inkjet printer.

I have heard that there are several printing companies in DC that specialize in preparing submissions to SCOTUS.

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 4:04 pm

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:56 pm What a puff piece by the Illinois Review.

It's their standard fare.

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 11:04 am

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 4:04 pm

Dave from down under wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:56 pm What a puff piece by the Illinois Review.

It's their standard fare.

Is it "journalism" like NewsMax?

jemcanada2 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 7:59 am So no inartfully collated and defectively stapled submissions?

northland10 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:40 pm Did we miss this filed at the end of February?

I have not read but since it has a lower court ruling, I assume it may be about his phone.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.asp ... 3-950.html

QUESTIONS PRESENTED
The extraordinary number of conclusions in the opinion below that conflict starkly with applicable precedents smacks of a judicial process that strains to reach a result based on the identity of the parties rather than the rule of law. The maneuvers of the Eighth Circuit to evade the governing precedents that protect Lindell’s First and Fourth Amendment rights have produced a decision crafted to apply only to Lindell, unanchored to the well-established legal principles that safeguard the rights of everyone else. The case presents the following questions:
1. Whether a preliminary injunction may be granted if it requests the ultimate relief sought in the litigation.
2. Whether a warrant is invalid for failure to comply with the particularity requirement of the Fourth Amendment where the warrant authorizes the seizure of all electronic data stored on a cell phone

KURT B. OLSEN
OLSEN LAW, P.C.
1250 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Suite 700
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 408-7025 ko@olsenlawpc.com

PATRICK M. MCSWEENEY
Counsel of Record
ROBERT J. CYNKAR
MCSWEENEY, CYNKAR & KACHOUROFF, PLLC
13649 Office Place
Suite 101
Woodbridge, VA 22192
(703) 621-3300
patrick@mck-lawyers.com rcynkar@mck-lawyers.com

pipistrelle wrote: ↑Sun Mar 10, 2024 1:40 pm Who's Kurt B. Olsen?