44
posted ago by Legalpede ago by Legalpede +44 / -0

Legalpede 101 AMA:

lawyer pede here. AMA re legal process questions for the legal fights going on, I'll do my best to answer.

Situation so far: GEOTUS is besieged by hostile forces in his administration and around the republic. (Check out the manpower reshuffle going on right now)

There are two battles, a Legal battle, and a Public Opinion battle. The traitors have the entire MSM and so the public opinion battle is as hardly fought as any other. It is important for this reason that 'relatable' bits of evidence get into the national conscienceness (specific dead people voting, specific voters who had their vote stolen by someone else, specific people who got multiple ballots, specific instances of witnessed fraud, criminality, and other malfeasance.

In the legal battle there are many battlefronts, each state has its own laws, and requires locally licensed attorneys to make appearances on behalf of the campaign. I've seen pleadings filed in PA and MI. MI pleadings alleged pages of widespread fraud. In states where fraud is established, a Judge may grant relief.

Relief requested must become, at a minimum, a Vote 'Audit', a recount without an audit is essentially useless (otherwise same fraudulent ballots go into same machines). Other relief could be an election do-over in a particular state (this has been done in other kinds of elections with even a small amount of fraud proved). GEOTUS legalbeagles appear to be going for Recount in GA and WI. Lawsuits pending in PA

GA: Recount/Audit WI: Recount/(Audit?) PA: Lawsuit (Relief requested: disqualify hundreds of thousands of ballots). Ballots arriving too late supposed to be segregated. NV: Investigating out of state voters, and other fraud (looking at you californians) AZ: Unknown (Sharpiegate not gaining much traction legally as far as I know) MI: Suit alleging massive levels of fraud launched. Pleadings are extensive, and if even half of it is true, it is worth becoming top MSM story regardless of whether it makes a difference in who wins.

AMA (& I'll do my best to answer). Other legalpedes welcome to opine.

For the Republic!

Comments (25)
sorted by:
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
4
Legalpede [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is probably the big one we're hoping for right now, we need a good solid win for the public opinion battle! MSM can't ignore the effort if we flipped PA!

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Legalpede [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Honestly I don't recall anything about refusal of observers (though I have to admit I wasn't a lawyer (or even old-enough to care much about politics) back then ;D

My cursory examination of Bush v Gore was that most of it had to do with batches of ballot irregularities, (the most famous being the hanging-chads, of course).

To MY mind, the refusal of observers is so egregious (and such a 'bad-faith' thing to do) that all ballots processed during that time should be immediately disqualified. Unfortunately there is 'the will of the voter' to consider here, so a Judge is less likely to use such a powerful remedy in such a politically charged situation. Still, its possible! I do expect at least SOME of those ballots to go into the garbage.

3
Evzada 3 points ago +3 / -0

How will the destruction of mail-in-ballot envelopes in PA complicate the GOP legal proceedings? I assumed these were needed to verify the allegations of naked ballots and mail-in-ballot back-dating.

4
Legalpede [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

Patriots may argue that we can't verify the ballots and they should be discarded, leftists will argue that is an extreme remedy. Normally a failure by the wrongdoer to secure evidence like this would be construed against the wrongdoer. A Judge could decide that any questionable ballots that can't be fully verified can be tossed. You can't destroy evidence, in a way you're specifically not allowed to do, and then cry when the result is you've invalidated the votes.

If the date of arrival is unknown they will try some other way to show which ballots are which (should be chain of custody for votes), if the chain is so broken and confused, this should cut against leftists not against Patriots. It is there responsibility to follow all these rules, their failure to do so should only hurt their arguments, it is not the responsibility of the voter to prove an unsecured vote is not legit, its their responsibility to prove it IS (by following the procedures that establish the rebuttable presumption of legitimacy),

If that isn't what happens, I'd say the Judge is probably biased.

1
Evzada 1 point ago +1 / -0

Excellent answer and thanks for doing this AMA, definitely needed here

2
Slick_Willys_Willy 2 points ago +2 / -0

These sworn affidavits from people regarding voter fraud. How serious are the consequences if any of them are lying?

3
Legalpede [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Depends on how big the lie was. If someone tells a real-whopper and the whole investigation hinges on it, they'll investigate the person/situation and if it falls apart it could sink the whole argument. (Consequences for the person telling the lie could be severe though, especially since the leftists would love an opportunity to nail someone to the wall for perjury in order to scare other potential upstarts)

Best I can tell, there are tons of smaller allegations, so if some small details goes awry it will not affect the court's decision. The Court will need to be convinced by the totality of the evidence in a particular case.

Honestly, I think we're going to need testimony from whistleblowers of the software company to really hammer home the idea of 'massive' fraud.

WE ALWAYS NEED MORE AFFADAVITS!

2
Slick_Willys_Willy 2 points ago +2 / -0

I really hope they have secured those whistle blowers.

Thank you for the more detailed explanation. I appreciate you taking the time

2
Legalpede [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

The deepstate needs to understand they can't get away with this one.. They won't go quietly!

2
0x4D414741 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thank you for doing this!

  1. What is your take on PA ignoring Alito's segregation order? Will this sort of behavior sway Roberts to not be a cuck out of desire that SCOTUS orders not be treated as suggestions in the future?

  2. Will there be a penalty to PA for violating that order outside of the ruling on the case?

  3. Do you think Thomas will recuse himself due to past history with Biden in these cases? The left seems to be concerned about this, but we elect these judges because they can put aside their differences (I also doubt it would have any effect on the end result of how Thomas would rule in either case).

  4. If you were to bet on the outcome of the end result of the PA cases alone, what would you say the odds are of Trump winning the state?

2
Legalpede [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0
  1. I think we have to assume Roberts is being blackmailed by Obama/Biden/Brennan/Comey spying/hacking (whether that means 'the HAMR' or some other method). The fact that he has turncoated so hardcore makes him totally unreliable when he is most needed. I suspect he is the Ace-in-the-hole for the treasonous cabal. Eventually there will be some reckoning in PA over those votes though, there are simply too many BS-votes for them to ignore and do nothing. But they may not get any relief from the PA-SupremeCourt because its politically compromised.
  2. I want to say yes, but it seems dems get away with everything, and even when they don't, they still don't get punished 1/10th as hard as they could be by law. Courts will be conservative about punishing any politicians (because they don't want to become 'political' and because they figure the electorate should do that by voting.....ironically its not clear if the people CAN vote anymore)
  3. SC Justices are not required to recuse themselves. He will only recuse himself (IMO) if he is blackmailed/threatened.
  4. I'm hesitant to put a figure on it. But the 'feel' is that PA is going well. Truthfully, if we can't even get PA then we're doomed lol. I'll say that odds are greater than 50/50 that we get PA either by tossing out the illegal ballots en masse, or... by the Republican legislature getting involved (They have started to hedge their wording about not ever getting involved, and now its become that they 'normally' don't get involved).
1
0x4D414741 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks, that's a really interesting point about #2...if the position of SCOTUS and Roberts in general is that the people's recourse is to vote out the asshats...in this case, they literally cannot vote out the asshats because they're rigging the elections. I would think that's a scenario that violates the general principle of let the people decide with their votes.

2
Legalpede [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would think so!

Unfortunately I've seen some tone-deaf decisions in court opinions before.

But its really hard to imagine what a Judge will try to dobecause this is such a BIG thing, and there is alot of social and political pressure from both the loyal American people on one side, and the treasonous-leftist-cabal+MSM+Establishment on the other. Most of them will try hard to shirk their duties. We need some Hero Judges to do the right thing!

Remember your oath Judges!

1
roytheboy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Where did you read about them ignoring the segregation order? I thought they were complying?

1
0x4D414741 1 point ago +1 / -0

Alito had to issue a second order because they had changed the guidance after he issued the first one to circumvent it. https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1324879506168012803/photo/1

1
roytheboy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Isn't that the first order you linked? From what I understood, the law was they had to segregate the ballots. They claimed to be doing that, but we got Alito to issue an order (on Nov 6) to make sure they were. But maybe I'm wrong.

1
0x4D414741 1 point ago +1 / -0

I linked the second order on it the first was part of the denial to expedite https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-542_i3dj.pdf

Note the last two pages. The court was under the impression that ballots were to be segregated because the state ordered it. Then on the 7th Alito issued a second order because they changed the guidance and didn't inform the court and it was alleged that some counties had not abided by it, so he ordered that the previous guidance be ordered for all counties. But this is after the fact. If they weren't complying in the first place it's really questionable whether they were can comply after the fact.

2
BidenwontwinPA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Legalpede, I do have two questions.

  1. Do you feel that POTUS is filing cases because he feels that he could win them or to just stall so that electors won't be sent from MI, PA, etc.?

  2. Should we be concerned that POTUS' lawyers are only filing cases this week?

2
Legalpede [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think the big picture is still being hidden. They are likely protecting the biggest evidence/witnesses because its wrapped up in National Security, and China, and higher-up traitors.

I expect we'll get the MOAB this week, or at least enough information to know why this election can't be certified (or why that certification will have to be set aside after the fact, because China interfered in the election).

If there is literally nothing going on behind the scenes, and it is just these lawsuits we can see, then we still have a good changes of do-overs in key states, but that wouldn't do justice to the downballot candidates, so as a practical matter we need new elections.

2
BidenwontwinPA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks pede

2
Legalpede [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

<3

1
Legalpede [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

BREAKING!! - PA Court Rules - VOTES NOT TO BE COUTED! Board of Elections lacked statutory authority to allow Late votes! (May still go to SCOTUS)

https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8XUpYIb/breaking--pa-court-rules--votes-/c/

1
0x4D414741 1 point ago +1 / -0

This thread needs a sticky!