Senator Doug Mastriano is attempting today to get enough support to pass a resolution that would enable Pennsylvania to exercise their constitutional authority to seat the electors themselves and decide which electors to send to DC to vote for president. But enough of his colleagues need to support it in order for it to pass.
CALL THEM AND EMAIL!!! (PREFERABLY CALL). LET THEM KNOW HOW YOU FEEL. DEMAND THEY DO THIS. IF THEY DON'T, DEMAND TO KNOW WHY.
IF THEIR VOICEMAIL IS FULL, EMAIL THEM, AND THEN CALL BACK LATER.
PA senate:
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/contact.cfm?body=S
PA House of Representatives:
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/contact.cfm?body=H
Not sure who your PA state senator or representatives are? Click here
Doug Mastriano was on War Room this morning in case you missed it. The PA senate leadership was dragging their feet and Doug said we needed to contact the legislature:
https://youtu.be/hXQ4kDgjDiU?t=5786 (timestamp 1:36:20)
And remember: Even if the resolution is introduced and passes, enough republicans in both houses are going to have to flip to supporting Trump electors, not Biden. Remember how weak-kneed they are!
If you live outside Pennsylvania, you can still contact the Senate and House leadership:
Senate Pro Tem (republican): Jake Corman / (717) 787-1377 / (814) 355-0477 /
Senate Majority Leader (republican): Kim L. Ward / (717) 787-6063 / (724) 600-7002 /
Speaker of the House of Reps (republican): Bryan Cutler / (717) 284-1965 / (717) 783-6424 /
Majority leader of House of Reps (republican): Kerry A. Benninghoff / +1 (814) 355-1300 / (717) 783-1918 /
To get it to SCOTUS where it matters as fast as possible is what I would assume. I didnt catch that part when I was listening, I only heard the witnesses.
That doesn't make any sense from a legal procedure standpoint. The case that gets appealed is frozen at what it was originally. You appeal based on error by the lower courts. You can't create new claims.
I think they want to keep most of the evidence close to the chest, not reveal too much in the lower courts, because they dont want to litigate in a lower court that might drag its feet on everything, so they file a small claim, and the court says fuck off, its an overall strategy to get the SCOTUS asap.
The SC is not where you present new evidence. That is simply not how legal procedure works. You merely argue the lower court erred in some way. And if you have fuck all for evidence in the lower court (and didn't even bother to plead fraud), the SC isn't going to help you.
Well the lower court just ruled that there is no evidence. Which now, clearly there is. Hopefully the affidavits and exhibits can be added to scotus court to prove they do indeed have evidence and just cause.
they both granted a motion to dismiss so evidence was never brought up/evaluated so they can't say no evidence
This is a good point.
There is no hopefully about it. You cannot add new evidence. People seem to think at every appeal there is a whole new hearing and presentation of evidence. You appeal specific rulings, that's all.
Yeah that makes sense. And they cannot add fraud to any of the cases, like let’s say PA?
I heard Powell say a couple weeks ago “we can add fraud to any one of the cases”
Perhaps she meant add it BEFORE they file it, not after during appeal.
Yes I agree. I haven’t seen what evidence was or wasn’t included in the filing of this case. Seems that PA was filed as solely as civil rights, not including any fraud. From what everyone’s telling me, I guess they can’t add evidence now.
But affidavits from the military intelligence in Powell’s GA & MI cases say votes were switched in “all swing states”. Maybe that will open up the can of worms