By the day, it is becoming increasingly apparent that our sacred electoral system has become compromised. As each day passes, thousands more Americans become aware of this. The evidence of fraud is overwhelming, and the people of the United States are outraged and disenfranchised.
As a citizen of the USA, this is of dire importance to me, and as it should be to you. You took an Oath of Office. It is your moral, and your Constitutional duty, to route out crime within this country, and within our government.
Millions of average Americans like myself are watching, and we are watching closer by the day. The time to act is now; I implore you - join the Texas lawsuit, and uphold the United States Constitution.
Oregon AG let it go to message. I made sure to leave one though! Will probably call Idaho and Wyoming tomorrow to round out the region. All states. A AGs. All numbers. No quarter.
I don't understand how these states can sue themselves. I live in one of them and personally think the state was stolen, but I don't think it's possible to sue for them. Am I missing something?
Texas is suing those four states for violating the constitution by changing election law without their legislatures' approval, and for violating the equal protection clause for applying different rules in different counties. It's a unique and creative angle, and it goes straight to the federal SCOTUS since it's between states. That's plain and simple to me. What's so hard to understand?
George AG vs State of Georgia could actually work in a certain framework, but not this one... much like any State which decidedly voted for Biden could not make such a suit since it then becomes an internal matter.
They are not suing for them. They are suing for their state. Because of the way theywent against the constitutional laws, so it will effect their state if Biden wins. These state did things the legal right way. The others cheated, by changing laws they could not legally change! Therefore changing the electric results.
Yes, and doesn't all four of those states (MI, PA, WI, GA) have Republican legislatures? Getting the AG in a state with a Republican legislature is not impossible!
AMZN WA AG Bob Ferguson doesn't work for me, so no point in getting my name on some watch list by calling
edit: in fact, he's probably already prepping the lawsuit he and a bunch of other AG's are going to file against Trump because him winning is racist against Mexicans or something
Just emailed Mr Yost, if all of us blow their phones and emails up it might just do something, every supporter of 2 time winning President Trump all play a roll in saving our nation!
Same with Kentucky. Good AG. Compromised Dim Governor who used the switching software we know of to cheat. Interesting though it was the Governor who filled him into that role to become Governor. Beshear doesn't have the control he would like with all the republican representatives surrounding him.
I'm told by my friends here in Indiana that when he was the Elkhart County prosecutor, he was a pretty awesome dude. Since he's not re-elected as the AG this year, I figured he would join as he's got nothing to lose anyway.
I don't see this Iowa AG is being lit up by anyone at all unfortunately. He probably would not join the Texas suit in any case anyway, seeing what I am seeing on his Twitter, but I guess there is no harm trying to add pressure!!!
He is not MAGA, nor on Team Trump, etc., etc., etc. He has a pinned post - a letter to Pompeo and Barr, signed by multiple leftie AGs, to attempt to censor the sharing of 3D print files by the Defense Dept. and it includes how to print certain guns apparently, from what I see.
It is signed by the AG in my State (Becerra) and that's def enough for me. Anything our AG is "for", we know is NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE of this country. Ever. Just saying.
I didn't even check. Didn't have to when I saw that letter, what it was regarding, and Becerra joining. Wow, have you ever read up on that guy? I first found out about him during the Awan Bros. travesty. He was one of the congressmen up to his neck in that (allegedly of course) . . . and then Newsom chose him to be our AG! Then FBI (shock) asked for his computer that he was using when he was back in congress, involved in that treasonous Awan mess (allegedly, of course) and he gave them some other computer and told them that was the one he'd used!! And he never got into one bit of trouble over it. He's still doing all he possibly can to harass & punish the President ... and the People of the State of CA, every time I turn around. Sorry to rant, can't help myself. I am just bitter.
Imagine all these red states joining Texas as the plantiff, while commiefornia and some other blue states joining those four crooked states as defendant. That's a new political civil war scenario if this case escalates in that direction. If the SCOTUS takes up this historic case - which is very likely to happen, and renders a result that decertifies the electoral votes from those four states in anyway - which is also very likely to happen, considering the merit of this case and the makeup of the justices, I wouldn't be surprised if some west coast and new england states declare that they secede from the union. That would be a real new civil war.
Funny... When I copy and paste the same thing, the arm is missing too. But it's there when I copy it. Must have something to do with the formatting here? Weird. Maybe I'm just not internetting right.
Actually it appears to be the opposite. Backslash is the escape character. Meaning if placed in from of a Markdown marker character, like a *, it will cause it to appear, rather than be erased.
Perhaps it means he will be joining all voter evidence his team has uncovered to be brought into the suit, as Texas will be able to give a complete picture how not only did these battleground states circumvent the Constitution by changing the process without legislative approval, but also used extensive and massive amounts of proven fraud, thereby nullifying the citizens of Texas' legal votes and electors.
Texas, and other joining states, are showing how the actions of these battleground states have cheated their own state's citizens out of a free and fair election, in a proven unconstitutional way, as well as with massive fraud, and how allowing these results will nullify the integrity of all future elections and cheat their own state out of the rightfully elected President Trump. But this is just a best guess tbh.
Thank you for trying to answer the most basic question regarding this.
All I know is this was likely Trump's plan all along. Getting a (big) state to sue the battleground states where the most obvious fuckery took place - and enough to swing the election or at least keep either candidate from claiming victory if electors are held up... This is how all the evidence gets shown - and no telling what that may be if the "white hats taking server in Frankfurt" is accurate.
Take notes. Our grandkids will be asking about these times in the decades to come.
I know all signs point to it but man.., I just really want to know! What a misdirection if the were just using the other cases as feelers while this one was being built. Seems like it but who really knows!
The best we can get from SCOTUS is to send it back to the state legislatures to appoint electors. Rudy's hearings are vital to convince them that there was fraud, on top of procedural issues
I love Trump but Maybe he shouldnβt intervene presence makes it seem like the one on the wrong side of an outcome is petitioning the court, whereas when Texas did it was a 3rd party demanding the court follow the constitution.
Also I love Giuliani, heβs Americaβs mayor and a hero, but heβs so battleworn heβs no longer polished.
I think the Texas AG comes from a polished position of strength, the media has had its time to successfully Giuliani let him take break and put a fresh face on this.
I think perhaps it is because Trump's evidence can be introduced. Like if he really does have the Frankfurt server and data packets collected being transfered overseas by Dominion... That would be Kracka-lackan
No one is saying it isn't. The question was, "What does Trump's intervention mean legally?" I stated maybe this us what it means. If you cannot state with absolute certainty what it actually does mean then you cannot state with absolute certainty that it does not mean this.
Once again, no one ever said you didnt know. I said that IF you dont know for sure what it does mean then you dont know for sure it doesn't mean that. If you knew perhaps you should have stated that to the 20 people above me who asked wtf it meant rather than skipping past all of them to my attempt and stating mine was wrong without even stating what it meant in your first reply.
Well they definitely violated the law by changing procedures at the Executive and Judicial level, rather than legislative approval. This is how they violated the Constitution, and what the foundation of Texas' lawsuit is. Only the legislature had the power to make changes.
Liberalretards keep saying they were in place months before the election. That's irrelevant. The written legislation is the sole power, just as the written Constitution is the sole power over the entire US.No executive or judicial decision can be made that goes against it, or outside of it. It would be like the President, the Executive branch, pardoning someone who violated state law, and a conservative state level judge saying it was okay because he was president. Nope. The power of the Constitution only gives him federal pardoning power, and this would be an overreach of Executive and Judicial power.
There are probably better examples of what I'm trying to say, but this was off the cuff. The point being, state legislation had the procedure set a specific way by written law. The Executors over the electoral agencies allowed acts and procedures that violated this written law/ procedure, and the state judicial branch allowed it anyways.
Not even taking into effect how many fraudulent mail in ballots there were, ANY ballots that were accepted outside of written legislative procedure of state law is a violation of the Constitution, and in this case it was enough to give Trump the election hands down. Thus is the crux of Texas' lawsuit. That Texas' citizens were harmed by having their electoral votes nullified by these states operating outside of the Constitution, as well as every state currently signing onto the lawsuit.
As to the proof of fraudulent votes, that will be icing on the cake, but not actually necessary to win at this point. Sorry this was so long winded.
Like the CNN panel with 5 dems and 1 republican and they all slam on the one dude. Or the Fox panels, the defendants are basically Juan from Fox's "the five"
Nope the 16 states just help. They park the Texas lawyers cards, make sure the megaphone has fresh batters... and jump in for any best downs when the exams layers fists start hurting.
They filed briefs to urge the SCOTUS to take the case. Don't post things like this, if you don't understand what's going on.
This is not the actual case. Right now Texas is pleading to get the case fast tracked into the actual court. The states don't need to become co-plaintiffs until after the case is taken up and the actual case is begun.
There may be some question as to whether or not they can actually join the Texas suit (heard it on Bannon, but I'm not a lawyer). Conversely, there is no question that these states can file Amicus so I'm glad to see so many did that so far.
I was so hopeful At a minimum Josh stein would have lost, with that race being so close. But I havenβt heard a peep from any candidates that lost in NC.
I think there is something fishy with the Dictator Cooper reelection too. I heard his slander campaign against Forest regarding masks did some damage, but like you said, he's pissed of tons of Democrat business owners etc. Everyone I know (including myself) voted for Forest.
And some of us have been to/through this rodeo before a time or two. Learning from "elder"pedes helps as well; other benefits include: not starting off at square one on everything, gives perspective, evens the keel, and speeds things up. More winning too.
People downvoting you have to learn to deal with reality. Yesterday was not a particularly good sign for our chances at the SCOTUS. Getting 17 states to join in today probably helps. It's hard to say how much. If they had all 46 remaining states, the deep staters on the court probably wouldn't care either way.
Yesterday was literally nothing. There's basically zero chance or reasoning for injunctive relief. Injunctive relief is when you ask the court to stop someone from doing something because you are alleging harm prior to hearing the case to determine if there is harm or not.
For example, if I am dumping some sort of questionable trash on my land and my neighbors might ask for injunctive relief because they are suing me and if it turns out what I'm doing is damaging my neighbors then it's better that I stopped sooner. Therefore the court orders an injunction forcing me to stop until the case gets decided.
It's pretty impossible to allege a damage to the president worthy of injunctive relief when no matter what happens he is still president for another 40 or so days. So when you consider that nothing actually happens until Jan 20th and until then anything can happen there's really no need for injunctive relief.
Yeah there is the safe harbor date but the court knows that isn't really a thing.
I read into it that he was saying that we (meaning a significant portion of the MAGA faithful), took an emotional blow based on some understandably confusing news. I get it. Anyone who suggests that they're aware enough of all of the nuances of the myriad things going with this fight and has been able to keep 100% up-to-date and never suffered an emotional letdown moment is likely heavily medicated, retarded, or not as informed as they believe they are. If they're none of those things, then they're the rarest of Pepes. It's hard not to react emotionally to what appears to be bad news, it's a reaction. That being said, there's way too many doomers dooming here. Those aren't the people innocently misunderstanding some of those nuances and then apologizing and accepting correction from the community, it's the ones making bold proclamations and drawing conclusions from their ignorance and trying to convince others to that effect.
Did we live the same day yesterday? Because I thought yesterday was a great day for us.
Texas lawsuit enters SCOTUS docket.
Flynn case dismissed by Sullivan.
Inauguration committee votes NOT to recognize Biden as president-elect.
Swalwell's girlfriend outed as a Chinese spy.
Pennsylvania answers Alito, and all they can come up with was a pathetic "yes, there may have been fraud, but the Supreme Court should just let it slide."
Well for what it's worth, that shouldn't be a gut punch or change anything, because the merits of the case are the same whether it's just Texas or all 50 states. SCOTUS rules on legal merits, not by taking a vote for how many states will sign on.
The content of the case determines the winner, so one state is perfectly fine.
That's true, but cases are being tossed with alarming ease by activist judges and I think having more states on board will increase scrutiny and visibility and maybe make that a little less likely. Just sort of makes it feel more legitimate and not just like some kook in TX throwing a Hail Mary.
Yes that is exactly what that supposed legal expert was posting everywhere on that thread last night. he was really and in my bvew intentionally trying tp discourage positive efforts.
There was a picture of him with a Chinese girl allegedly acting as his girlfriend (who also apparently swallowed well) but turned out she was a Chinese asset.
Well, the lid blew off of that yesterday and today, so he's now making the talk show circuit claiming that it's all a complex lie to tarnish his good fart-holding name.
It would've been funny if he had banged the hell out of her and enjoyed himself thoroughly while feeding her completely fake disinfo the entire time so she got nothing of value at all, just lies that led her handlers on time-wasting/resource-wasting wild goose chases.
Swalwell was having sexual relations with a Chinese agent for 6 years and the feds caught him. The story blew up yesterday, and he just got kicked off of the House Intel Committee today.
Wow, I like the pause just to let her feel good about herself before he donkey punches her. This bitch is maybe the second most stupid I've seen in any of the hearings so far. One would think she would do a little research. These people are on a list presented in advance.
I hope the very convincing argument against Dominion she made a couple of months ago is played in court and helps secure convictions. Maybe even her own! π€£π€£
John Eastman is THE GUY you want on your team when arguing a matter of constitutional law. He is more of a scholar than Sidney but equally effective. D A M N!
I recognized his name right away. Dude is based. I loved that when I search his name to make sure I was thinking of the right fella the only thing that popped up was a smear article that he is a Kamala Harris birther lmao. This fuckin' timeline.
Apparently some law professor. Son of showbiz attorney Lee Eastman who worked with Paul McCartney as a solo artist after suing to dissolve The Beatles partnership. And his sister is Linda McCartney.
Yes this is big because evidence can be presented in this case by Trump or any of the other states listed. If SCOTUS was asked to review any case from the states they would not have been able to add any new evidence into the lawsuit and a lot of the lower courts dismissed a ton of evidence already.
This is most likely will be the biggest court case of our life time.
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
It will be ok to delay the election, and even inauguration, to make sure we expose as much of the Democrat &RINO cheating. you know it will be ok to delay, because, Covid (#ChinaVirus)
I prefer the full fat stuff as well, but I don't eat it enough for it to be a problem. Remember, there is no magic bullet. Eat right exercise everything in moderation.
Trump has intervened because he has an interest in the outcome of the states. He has alleged one count of the violation of the Elector's Clause, which is a repeat of the TX claims, but from the perspective of POTUS.
It "means" that the opposition has more fronts to fight. It means that SCOTUS has more arguments to consider.
Probably but this case really doesn't require it. It's a purely constitutional case which is impossible without being cucks for the court to ignore because it's extremely clear in these 4 states the federal constitution and in some cases their own state constitution was violated.
As a resident of one of the lawless States, I agree!
It is mainly in 2 counties, Democrats&RINOs target the counties with the the greatest population, that is where they can add/change the most votes. They have an interest in those counties staying shit-holes so good people don't want to go there to participate in elections.
IT is essential to remember they cheat in so many ways, it is not just mail-in, it is also people voting multiple times, counting single ballots multiple ballots, destroying ballots, switching votes in counting/voting machine software, ballot harvesting, and more and more and more. We need to expose all of it, as much as we can it is HUGE Democrats cannot win half their state or Federal elections with out cheating. HALF, think about that. Half as many in the House, and Senate, and Governors, and State legislatures. President Trump is burning them to the ground.
I hope you are right with that last sentence. I'm saying that they're only going after a small part of the fraud, due to the obvious time constraints. It'd be really nice to have the actual landslide a matter of record.
The also target the most population dense, high crime areas because it is there where they can recruit the most helpers out of a high population of the usual suspects.
They are corrupt, they keep those areas shit-holes, so good people will not want to go there and work elections. They exploit the poor and the weak, just the opposite of what the maga movement does, and we are a movement.
And he does NOT need to prove that there was fraud. Read this:
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
Pls baby jesus be right. I feel it deep in my bones. Its like my ancestors prepared me for this moment. Its a deep feeling unparalleled. And Ive got a feeling weve got this. Truth is on our side. We are just waiting for the massive redpill to get the masses
Yes, but he does NOT need to prove fraud. This excerpt makes this crystal clear:
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
John Eastman is a well-known top U.S. constitutional lawyer, who is representing Trump in this matter as counsel of record -- stated in front of the PDF linked in the post title.,.
Eastman is more seasoned on specifically the constitution.
Tag team at SCOTUS??
In 2000 tag team, Ted Olsen (wife died on 9/11) representing Bush was not very effective on his feet, while the Tallahassee based (Democrat !) lawyer representing Bush at FL SC and then at SCOTUS, Barry Richard, was excellent.
I was a volunteer for Sharron Angle in her 2006 primary run for House vs. Dean Heller, and in 2010 for Senate (primary and then general vs. Harry Reid). She is a constitutional warrior, eventually winning against her own NV legislature, governor and state SC !!
Brilliant strategy so far... Play the "fraud, fraud, fraud" card, which of course enormous amount of evidence, but they knew it would be "denied" by the left. Then drop the "this is unconstitutional" card, cause the left has not read The U.S. Constitution and does not know how to defend their illegal election doings.
I almost suspect the Powell (who is from Texas) and Rudy show was intended to bring attention to the unavoidable political controversy so that the real straightforward legal effort, TX v PA et al, could move in for the kill without the stink of that controversy.
Powell and Rudy ran the circus not caring that a court wouldn't even listen, they just had to get it into the public, which they did. The TX court makes reference to the fraud shown in the Powell Rudy cases, but without making any direct focus on the fraud.
The way the Texas suit is written, Texas can prevail without even ever mentioning any fraud whatsoever.
100 percent this. It provides us with the material to explain why it's ok to our democrat loved ones who are about to be blindsided.
I have a deep blue cousin that moved to AZ and on election night was so happy that AZ voted blue. She's going to be devastated when she learns that her beloved party cheated. Rudy and Sydney provide easily accessible material to send her, and to help explain how this could have happened.
This would make sense! Remember that Rudy said he skipped the courts and went straight to the legislatures to show the evidence. This may have been why!
It keeps guns in the hands of potential criminals, allows suspects to talk to lawyers and also to not talk at all...
It's a historic relict, really, and has no place in modern society.
The only reason we keep this curiosoty around is that it also enables us to create pornography, bash religion, kill unborn babies and make other people pay for our healthcare.
Every twit tard claiming to be a lawyer so far seems to have no idea what the actual law is. There was a law professor that I easily could debunk in about 5 minutes of reading if I wasn't twitter banned.
The fact that nearly half of the country believes the election was stolen should come as no surprise. President Trump prevailed on nearly every historical indicia of success in presidential elections. For example, he won both Florida and Ohio; no candidate in historyβRepublican or Democratβhas ever lost the election after winning both States. And he won these traditional swing states by large marginsβOhio by 8 percentage points and 475,660 votes; Florida by 3.4 percentage points and 371,686 votes. He won 18 of the countryβs 19 so-called βbellwetherβ countiesβcounties whose vote, historically, almost always goes for the candidate who wins the election.2 Initial analysis indicates that he won 26 percent of non-white voters, the highest percentage for any Republican candidate since 1960,3 a fairly uniform national trend that was inexplicably not followed in key cities and counties in the Defendant States. And he had coattails but, as some commentators have cleverly noted, apparently no coat. That is, Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate and U.S. House, down to Republican candidates and the state and local level, all out-performed expectations and won in much larger numbers than predicted, yet the candidate for President at the top of the ticket who provided those coattails did not himself get over his finish line in first place. This, despite the fact that the nearly 75 million votes he receivedβa record for any incumbent Presidentβwas nearly 12 million more than he received in the 2016 election, also a record (in contrast to the 2012 election, in which the incumbent received 3 million fewer votes than he had four years earlier but nevertheless prevailed). These things just donβt normally happen, and a large percentage of the American people know that some-thing is deeply amiss.
So theyβre saying theyβre joining the case too? Along with
Amici curiae are the States of Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
He's almost factually correct. Missouri is officially part of the case, none of the others are. Yet.
Everyone is pointing to "additional counsel" on the filing as "proof" the additional states have joined the lawsuit, but that's not what it means. It's the AGs who have filed amicus briefs. I was just reading about it, it means they can drop out, if needed or by choice, and it doesn't impact the case and the judges don't have to allow them to drop out.
Becoming part of the lawsuit, as a lawyer of record, is what you're looking for, and only one state so far has - and it's from what I can dig up, premature for states to join the suit, as this is a pleading for the court hear the case. Once that's set in motion, it makes more sense to intervene and join in.
But pedes will keep repeating the wrong things, because that's how it works here - and anywhere else, really.
They may not have "Joined" the case but the 17 added states have information that is pertinent to the case.
An amicus 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. The phrase amicus curiae is legal Latin.Β
So basically yes they did join the case as witnesses for Texas
PEDES - The other 17 or 18 states did NOT join the suit. They submitted Amicus Briefs - meaning basically that they are showing support and may offer evidence. Trump's motion to intervene means he is asking to join the suit as an actual party (in this case, another plaintiff in addition to TX).
I take it Trump is saying that, as the Republican Party Candidate for president, he was directly harmed by the lawless actions of the four states in question (GA, MI, PA, WI) so he wants to join Texas in suing those four states.
Texas is saying that since those four states refused to follow the law during the election, they therefore invalidated Texas's election, too, since Texas (supposedly) DID follow the law during the election. That's why Texas is suing those states.
The other states listed, who filed Amici Curiae briefs, are not part of the suit (at least, not yet.) They are just saying, "Yeah, we be frens of Texas and we think they are doing the right thing by suing so Go, Texas!" But it's still a very good thing because this show of support will make it waaay harder for SCOTUS and Congress to ignore the case.
In other words:
It's like a tournament between 50 players where you find out four teams were cheating. That invalidates the tournament for EVERYONE because the other 46 players did not get a fair chance to win.
It's a weird thing, but keep in mind, voter fraud was at issue in 1960 as well (Texas and Illinois). That's likely not why it's in there, it's most likely a mistake...happens more often that we'd like to think even with awesome lawyers.
Right, they did not join the suit, but Amicus is significant and it shows they support the position and have what they feel is legitimate and compelling input related to that support. It's not just a random 'hey guys, me too" thing that has no meaning (especially when it's filed by several parties directly impacted by the EXACT claims made in the suit). Correct?
To the extent these drastic and fraud-inducing changes in state election law were done without the consent of the state legislature, the federal constitution was violated
One of my favorite things to do to new lieutenants in the Army. Literally no clue what to do with that one except pull a stupid face. Extra special if they're carrying something and drop all their shit saluting back.
You don't make them put it down, stand at attention to salute, then pick it back up again? Like a parade of senior officers trickling through a room making everyone drop everything every 2 minutes
Probably just to look smarter than the normies outside the field. I was in the medical field once and was constantly reminded that I had to use medical terms. Whenever I said "heart" or "liver" my superiors insisted that I should have said "cardiac" and "hepatic", even though that's the same thing.
He's asking to be made a co-plaintiff with TX in his individual capacity as a candidate for re-election. it's Trump and TX against the 4 states, if the court grants the motion.
This is no longer Trump's fight. This isn't about Trump. This is about America. Trump just exposed the enemy to us, for us to see. But everyone has to fight. Get the rest of those beautiful red states in the fight too.
I would say that crossing the Rubicon better describes every other legal effort failing which cannot happen until 1/6, and then legally assuming power indefinitely under emergency powers. Scary that it exists but in that case, it'd be the best way to save the Republic.
We should be able to free up a lot of money for that. Take it from money earmarked for Planned Parenthood, the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and CISA. All aforementioned programs have too many redundancies to count and may be terminated immediately.
***Just spoke to a woman at Wyoming AG office, she said the AG is highly considering it, and is making a list of people who call and ask them to join Texas and other States in the SCOTUS!!!! All's she asked me for was My name and State I live in.
π¨π¨π¨π¨π¨Call them ASAP π¨π¨π¨π¨π¨
Also same time Hunter released he is under investigation for tax fraud. Also a day after it came out China had a spy sleep with Swalwell with supposedly more Dems on the way. And that Canada invited China to do winter war games in Canada. A lot of dogs barking but which ones arenβt?
If you look really deep on the /pol/ archives (4plebs)....you'll find that coronavirus was already popping up on PCR's in Canada in October of 2019. Sure does make you wonder...
"230605403"
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
One of the allegations are that the machine switched millions of votes against Trump. If that is true, how is that discrepancy not caught in the hand recount?
Wisconsin did a hand recount. Sidney says 6 million votes across the country were switched against Trump by the machine. If that is true, why is that discrepancy between machine count and paper ballot not showing up?
To address some of the very common sentiments expressed in this thread...
The presence or absence of literal fraud is completely irrelevant. Now, you know, and I know, that there were massive amounts of it. But that makes no difference in this specific complaint whatsoever.
The Defendant states ran their elections unconstitutionally. It truly could have been the "most secure and fair election ever" as we hear repeated to us a hundred times a day in nearly every single form and fashion.
That would not change the fact that the election was administered in an unconstitutional manner.
Defendant states (one of which I reside in, to my shame) played stupid games. Now they get their "stupid prize" of having their Electors invalidated or replaced by their (Republican) State Legislators.
You have to give them credit for the attempt at subversion on the largest scale in our national history! But they've been caught dead to rights, and thankfully we have a POTUS and certain State officials who aren't backing down from their (correct) position.
NOT ONLY were the acts of the Governor's and other high level NON-Legislative officials unconstitutional, they ALSO had the added bonus of covering up almost ANY instances of fraud that came as a result of those unconstitutional acts.
Joe Biden may have received, like, 500 fraudulent votes. Maybe President Trump did too! Maybe all instances of fraud were made by individual citizens and had no bearing on the result.
OR
Joe Biden could have received the luxury of TENS OR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of votes that were either completely manufactured, or that were through various methods subtracted from legitimate Trump votes and put into the Biden column.
We have very little chance of ACTUALLY finding out with any degree of certainty or scale.
Oops! Golly, gosh... Yeah, well, that's just how we decided to hold our election this cycle. NO WAY to possibly get to the bottom of any questionable discrepancies though. We've shredded all the envelopes, reset the voting machines, and lost our chain of custody records. GEE, AW SHUCKS! That's just the way the cookie crumbles, eh?
It took me a while to understand why him joining the case would be of any use... but it's because it allows TWO arguments to be made and not just be a matter of States' rights and interests but also of Trump's rights and interests, so there are now two paths to victory in argument instead of one.
We're in a war and many of you are still listening to the propaganda of the other side. Of course it's demoralizing. That's the purpose. Tune out of that shit. There will be ups and downs every day in the battles. Some will be lost. But we will win the figurative and literal war. But you have to hang in there and stay strong. MAGA!!
The realization that this was a Trojan Horse just floored me. This is freaking huge! Trump will be able to present to the courts all the evidence that the lower courts have denied him. Jeez. Wow!
Not a lawyer. But from what I gather from the rest of the Pedes, and a few lawyer Pedes, it seems that because he hasn't been able to present any evidence at all in the lower courts (not by merits of the allegation) it will be like presenting the evidence for the first time to a judge. This was a brilliant move because if say, he was able to present evidence in lower courts and judges ruled against them by actual merits, then this process would've been drawn out and litigated through appellate courts and would never see the light of day.
Don't just read this and updoot. CALL THEM!!!!
THIS! This is one of the most important phone calls we can make
Call ALL STATES even the so-called βblueβ states. It must be know that we are the true...
SILENT MAJORITY
...and we are no longer silent.
If they answer on first rind they are not busy !!!
They will be when the snow hits tommorrow
Just contacted them all.
Subject: Join the Lawsuit.
Message: Mr. xxxxxxx,
By the day, it is becoming increasingly apparent that our sacred electoral system has become compromised. As each day passes, thousands more Americans become aware of this. The evidence of fraud is overwhelming, and the people of the United States are outraged and disenfranchised.
As a citizen of the USA, this is of dire importance to me, and as it should be to you. You took an Oath of Office. It is your moral, and your Constitutional duty, to route out crime within this country, and within our government.
Millions of average Americans like myself are watching, and we are watching closer by the day. The time to act is now; I implore you - join the Texas lawsuit, and uphold the United States Constitution.
Respectfully, xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
Feel free to use at your leisure.
Oregon AG let it go to message. I made sure to leave one though! Will probably call Idaho and Wyoming tomorrow to round out the region. All states. A AGs. All numbers. No quarter.
Absolutely!
Especially Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Georgia. Getting those states on-side is key!
Lol.... so let it be done!
To kill the first-born Pharaoh son I'm creeping deathHhhhhhhhhh
Sorry, had to
Dah Dah Dah dahhh dahdah dahdah dahhh
Hahahahahah.... you're this first to catch it.
The Marxist lesbian AG in Michigan will surely get on board.
Good God are you talking about Nessle? She has a very aggressive dike face.
I don't understand how these states can sue themselves. I live in one of them and personally think the state was stolen, but I don't think it's possible to sue for them. Am I missing something?
Texas is suing those four states for violating the constitution by changing election law without their legislatures' approval, and for violating the equal protection clause for applying different rules in different counties. It's a unique and creative angle, and it goes straight to the federal SCOTUS since it's between states. That's plain and simple to me. What's so hard to understand?
But will these other states have standing? Is there any precedent for other states suing successfully in these circumstances?
George AG vs State of Georgia could actually work in a certain framework, but not this one... much like any State which decidedly voted for Biden could not make such a suit since it then becomes an internal matter.
They are not suing for them. They are suing for their state. Because of the way theywent against the constitutional laws, so it will effect their state if Biden wins. These state did things the legal right way. The others cheated, by changing laws they could not legally change! Therefore changing the electric results.
fang fang
Yes, and doesn't all four of those states (MI, PA, WI, GA) have Republican legislatures? Getting the AG in a state with a Republican legislature is not impossible!
Our Dem AG (and Gov and SoS) is (are) a scumbag(s) despite having Republican legislatures.
AMZNWA AG Bob Ferguson doesn't work for me, so no point in getting my name on some watch list by callingedit: in fact, he's probably already prepping the lawsuit he and a bunch of other AG's are going to file against Trump because him winning is racist against Mexicans or something
Tijuana aka Yakima?
True dat! I'm just surprised that Sideshow wasn't trying to push Inslee out of the Governor's seat this year.
This so much right now
We must be a group that takes initiative and action!
Agreed!
I think itβs awesome they all know exactly what weβre talking about despite the MSM censorship.
I ended up having to send emails today, All mailboxes full.
Same. We are also putting big pressure on Ohio because DeSwine is a RINO douche.
Yost needs to distance himself from DeWine, otherwise he'll get primaried too.
Aids-Stephen King better join this thing.
Ohio pedes should be putting the pressure on the OH Attorney General, Dave Yost. He is a state elected official, and IS NOT accountable to Gov DeWine.
thank you for doing your part!
CALL NOW!! AGs are standing by. Free Entertainment while you wait brought to you by TD.win.
IN typical CA fashion, there is no phone number and no general contact form. No right to redress of grievances in CA.
I've already emailed them. They won't respond, of course, but here ya go.
https://oag.ca.gov/contact/general-comment-question-or-complaint-form
Phone: (213) 250-3400
send angry postcards to:
777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 4050
Los Angeles, CA 90017
sauce: https://xavierbecerra.com/
Yeah. He's a shitbag. He was counting on a Biden presidency bc he would promote.
I hope President Trump promotes him to "fully incarcerated".
Same
Heeey baca-reia
He's all over trying to deprive you of your rights!
DONE. Did ID, NH, OH, WY.
Love you fren! My turn!
Go, Pedes, Go!
I'm on it too. Proud of you boys.
I 100% agree. Ohio's going to be a tough one with DeWine as Governor... Let's keep trying though!
I'm calling tomorrow
Just emailed Mr Yost, if all of us blow their phones and emails up it might just do something, every supporter of 2 time winning President Trump all play a roll in saving our nation!
Same with Kentucky. Good AG. Compromised Dim Governor who used the switching software we know of to cheat. Interesting though it was the Governor who filled him into that role to become Governor. Beshear doesn't have the control he would like with all the republican representatives surrounding him.
Also done!!! Come on pedes!
Tweet them too! Indiana AG: @AGCurtisHill
Wyoming AG: @usaowy
Idaho AG: @lawrencewasden
Kentucky AG: @kyoag
Ohio AG: @OhioAG
North Carolina AG: @NCAGO
Alaska AG: @USAO_AK
Nevada AG: @NevadaAG
Arizona AG: @GeneralBrnovich
Indiana already joined my dude. While our governor may be a RINO, our AG is apparently based
Excellent!
I'm told by my friends here in Indiana that when he was the Elkhart County prosecutor, he was a pretty awesome dude. Since he's not re-elected as the AG this year, I figured he would join as he's got nothing to lose anyway.
Our new AG Todd Rokita also voices his support, so that's good news for us Hoosiers
Then say "I just want to voice my support for your joining! Go Hoosiers!"
I just emailed him to thank him for joining on my behalf as a Hoosier.
Donald Rainwater 2024!
Indiana joined as one of the 17. If you tweet Curtis, thank him.
This is his official Twitter, I just went to his page: Curtis T. Hill, Jr. @AGCurtisHill
Curtis is in, and Todd looks to be on board too
I looked up Curtis, he seems to be a good man. Didn't look up the other guy, but trust you are correct!
Iowa AG: @AGIowa
He's getting lit up on Twitter right now, add to the pressure!
I don't see this Iowa AG is being lit up by anyone at all unfortunately. He probably would not join the Texas suit in any case anyway, seeing what I am seeing on his Twitter, but I guess there is no harm trying to add pressure!!!
He is not MAGA, nor on Team Trump, etc., etc., etc. He has a pinned post - a letter to Pompeo and Barr, signed by multiple leftie AGs, to attempt to censor the sharing of 3D print files by the Defense Dept. and it includes how to print certain guns apparently, from what I see.
It is signed by the AG in my State (Becerra) and that's def enough for me. Anything our AG is "for", we know is NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE of this country. Ever. Just saying.
He's being lit up by Iowa standards, there's not that many of us on twitter lol
Miller is a lifelong democrat, so definitely not MAGA
I didn't even check. Didn't have to when I saw that letter, what it was regarding, and Becerra joining. Wow, have you ever read up on that guy? I first found out about him during the Awan Bros. travesty. He was one of the congressmen up to his neck in that (allegedly of course) . . . and then Newsom chose him to be our AG! Then FBI (shock) asked for his computer that he was using when he was back in congress, involved in that treasonous Awan mess (allegedly, of course) and he gave them some other computer and told them that was the one he'd used!! And he never got into one bit of trouble over it. He's still doing all he possibly can to harass & punish the President ... and the People of the State of CA, every time I turn around. Sorry to rant, can't help myself. I am just bitter.
NC AG is a commie. Doesn't mean we shouldn't pressure him, though.
Hell, pressure the AG's in MI, WI, PA, and GA too! Let these assholes feel the heat. Who knows, maybe some of them will start to jump ship
Indiana already joined!
Imagine all these red states joining Texas as the plantiff, while commiefornia and some other blue states joining those four crooked states as defendant. That's a new political civil war scenario if this case escalates in that direction. If the SCOTUS takes up this historic case - which is very likely to happen, and renders a result that decertifies the electoral votes from those four states in anyway - which is also very likely to happen, considering the merit of this case and the makeup of the justices, I wouldn't be surprised if some west coast and new england states declare that they secede from the union. That would be a real new civil war.
Alaskan dudes last name is Sniffen? He has to be a Biden guy, no? WHAT A NAME!
Sniffen JR! even worse haha
Came here to imply this
There's no way Alaska's AG isn't a Biden supporter. His name is Sniffen.
Litterally LOL'd. π€£
That could mean Pedo Joe OR coke head Hunter
I doubt you'll be able to get Tom Miller since he is a Dem, but have at it.
Tom Miller is the longest of all long shots. If he joins, I'm looking for pigs outside hovering over the house.
I now know what my next drone project will be.
Pontificate away!
...
No Bob Ferguson is. The guy does nothing but sue Washingtonianβs into oblivion
Iowan here. We didn't even have a Republican run against him a couple of times, including 2018. He's no good.
What does that mean?
Β―_(γ)_/Β―
You dropped this breh: \
Kyle blew his bicep off, must have been up to no good.
Fuckin commies and their one arm.
TDW is the center of the Earth, so it is everywhere on it.
slowclap
That always happens when i try to paste Β―_(γ)_/Β― on this site for some reason.
Β―\_(γ)_/Β―
It is some markdown thing
So getting this to show you should paste this
Β―\\\_(γ)\_/Β―
Use two backslashes: this
\\becomes this \Sorry about your disability. You can still shoot left handed though
Rekt
Funny... When I copy and paste the same thing, the arm is missing too. But it's there when I copy it. Must have something to do with the formatting here? Weird. Maybe I'm just not internetting right.
Too much jerking off, pede. LOL
Β―\(γ)/Β― Thanks! It's the little things!
Β―\(γ)/Β―
Β―(γ)/Β― Thanks! Edit: Didn't work again and I copied yours. No matter, I just did the extra one like PinkoPatrol and it worked.
Have to escape the \ using "\\"
It does the same exact thing on Reddit. Must be a some bad copied coding.
No, it's just standard Markdown formatting. The slash means something in Markdown, so it gets erased when the text is parsed. I forget what exactly.
This pede learned to code π
Actually it appears to be the opposite. Backslash is the escape character. Meaning if placed in from of a Markdown marker character, like a *, it will cause it to appear, rather than be erased.
Perhaps it means he will be joining all voter evidence his team has uncovered to be brought into the suit, as Texas will be able to give a complete picture how not only did these battleground states circumvent the Constitution by changing the process without legislative approval, but also used extensive and massive amounts of proven fraud, thereby nullifying the citizens of Texas' legal votes and electors.
Texas, and other joining states, are showing how the actions of these battleground states have cheated their own state's citizens out of a free and fair election, in a proven unconstitutional way, as well as with massive fraud, and how allowing these results will nullify the integrity of all future elections and cheat their own state out of the rightfully elected President Trump. But this is just a best guess tbh.
Thank you for trying to answer the most basic question regarding this.
All I know is this was likely Trump's plan all along. Getting a (big) state to sue the battleground states where the most obvious fuckery took place - and enough to swing the election or at least keep either candidate from claiming victory if electors are held up... This is how all the evidence gets shown - and no telling what that may be if the "white hats taking server in Frankfurt" is accurate.
Take notes. Our grandkids will be asking about these times in the decades to come.
Well, there used to be this country called Chy-nah...
And no state is better at this role than the second most populous state in the nation the Great State of Texas.
Thank you Lord!
I really wish we knew if this was planned or just fate intervening. Brilliant or lucky... Iβll take either right now.
If God is actively involved, do not be surprised if it is "both". That is my current theory, anyway.
Someone has been telling us to remain calm.
I know all signs point to it but man.., I just really want to know! What a misdirection if the were just using the other cases as feelers while this one was being built. Seems like it but who really knows!
No no, it was not misdirected.
The best we can get from SCOTUS is to send it back to the state legislatures to appoint electors. Rudy's hearings are vital to convince them that there was fraud, on top of procedural issues
That is my hope. That the best evidence now has a chance of being shown and seen and heard.
We need to let others know what is happening - but calmly!
I love Trump but Maybe he shouldnβt intervene presence makes it seem like the one on the wrong side of an outcome is petitioning the court, whereas when Texas did it was a 3rd party demanding the court follow the constitution.
Also I love Giuliani, heβs Americaβs mayor and a hero, but heβs so battleworn heβs no longer polished.
I think the Texas AG comes from a polished position of strength, the media has had its time to successfully Giuliani let him take break and put a fresh face on this.
I think perhaps it is because Trump's evidence can be introduced. Like if he really does have the Frankfurt server and data packets collected being transfered overseas by Dominion... That would be Kracka-lackan
Oooh that makes sense. I couldnβt figure out his logic!
Doesnβt make it seem that way to ME. Does it make it seem that way to you? What about all the patriots who have his back?
That's later. Right now the fight is to get Texas into the court.
No one is saying it isn't. The question was, "What does Trump's intervention mean legally?" I stated maybe this us what it means. If you cannot state with absolute certainty what it actually does mean then you cannot state with absolute certainty that it does not mean this.
Intervening is a known legal thing - he's asking the court to be allowed to become a plaintiff. I absolutely DO know what it means.
Once again, no one ever said you didnt know. I said that IF you dont know for sure what it does mean then you dont know for sure it doesn't mean that. If you knew perhaps you should have stated that to the 20 people above me who asked wtf it meant rather than skipping past all of them to my attempt and stating mine was wrong without even stating what it meant in your first reply.
Theoretically, if Trump does have the dominion servers and he is allowed to present evidence in court, would this be the time to drop them?
I don't think so: this lawsuit is about the election officials violating the law, it's not about fraud per se
Well, didn't they violate the law based on fraud?
It would seem that's how they could prove it?
Well they definitely violated the law by changing procedures at the Executive and Judicial level, rather than legislative approval. This is how they violated the Constitution, and what the foundation of Texas' lawsuit is. Only the legislature had the power to make changes.
Liberalretards keep saying they were in place months before the election. That's irrelevant. The written legislation is the sole power, just as the written Constitution is the sole power over the entire US.No executive or judicial decision can be made that goes against it, or outside of it. It would be like the President, the Executive branch, pardoning someone who violated state law, and a conservative state level judge saying it was okay because he was president. Nope. The power of the Constitution only gives him federal pardoning power, and this would be an overreach of Executive and Judicial power.
There are probably better examples of what I'm trying to say, but this was off the cuff. The point being, state legislation had the procedure set a specific way by written law. The Executors over the electoral agencies allowed acts and procedures that violated this written law/ procedure, and the state judicial branch allowed it anyways.
Not even taking into effect how many fraudulent mail in ballots there were, ANY ballots that were accepted outside of written legislative procedure of state law is a violation of the Constitution, and in this case it was enough to give Trump the election hands down. Thus is the crux of Texas' lawsuit. That Texas' citizens were harmed by having their electoral votes nullified by these states operating outside of the Constitution, as well as every state currently signing onto the lawsuit.
As to the proof of fraudulent votes, that will be icing on the cake, but not actually necessary to win at this point. Sorry this was so long winded.
MCA!
Itβs fun to stay at the!
YYYYY
(οΏ£βοΏ£)
π€·πΌββοΈ
It means his legal team wants to join the lawsuit like the 17 states did I believe. Since the lawsuit was originally on behalf of Texas and not Trump.
No, he did not file an Amicus brief. He's asking to be co-plaintiff.
Yeah you're right. I didnt necessarily mean join in the same manner, just that they similarly want to join the suit.
Correct. He's saying that harm was done to him too.
So, like, 150 lawyers all cram into the courtroom and yell at the judges all at once?!
Like the CNN panel with 5 dems and 1 republican and they all slam on the one dude. Or the Fox panels, the defendants are basically Juan from Fox's "the five"
"Fox"? I don't know what that is. I know what OANN is, though.
Except now, people like Juan run the dumb channel.
The rest of the channel now make Juan look like the Conservative.
Nope the 16 states just help. They park the Texas lawyers cards, make sure the megaphone has fresh batters... and jump in for any best downs when the exams layers fists start hurting.
ONE BIG BEAUTIFUL LAWSUIT
the 17 states did not join the lawsuit. They sent an amicus brief, basically saying they agree with Texas.
They filed briefs to urge the SCOTUS to take the case. Don't post things like this, if you don't understand what's going on.
This is not the actual case. Right now Texas is pleading to get the case fast tracked into the actual court. The states don't need to become co-plaintiffs until after the case is taken up and the actual case is begun.
There may be some question as to whether or not they can actually join the Texas suit (heard it on Bannon, but I'm not a lawyer). Conversely, there is no question that these states can file Amicus so I'm glad to see so many did that so far.
yeah I believe they can't join it yet.. I think the scotus has to agree to hear the case first?
This! More people need to know this
From NC, can confirm :)
Also from NC. Cooper cheated and then gave up on cheating Thillis because he didn't want people to start asking questions about the election.
FUCK MASSAH COOPAH! We voted 55% for voter ID and he vetoed it. He is a scumbag tyrant. Deserves a traitors punishment.
Why are you smiling about that?
How do you know he's smiling and not a smile-wincing like Hold the Pain Harold?
How can you say that? there is mask mandate in NC that is in effect... he's wearing a mask.
I was so hopeful At a minimum Josh stein would have lost, with that race being so close. But I havenβt heard a peep from any candidates that lost in NC.
For now...
I think there is something fishy with the Dictator Cooper reelection too. I heard his slander campaign against Forest regarding masks did some damage, but like you said, he's pissed of tons of Democrat business owners etc. Everyone I know (including myself) voted for Forest.
I'm happy Mark Robinson won the Lt. Gov race.
I have the same question
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN ;_;
IT MEANS FOUR. MORE. YEARS!!!!!
Bro at a minimum.
:-D
Apparently it means they want to join the lawsuit as co-plaintiff.
Possibly, but right now, they filed to urge the court to take the case.
It means GEOTUS is filing to become a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit.
This, what does it mean?!
We didn't get beat yesterday. Stop following the enemy narrative.
I get what you are saying.
Heightened emotions on an emotional roller coaster tend to do that. We all need to just realize that most of us here have the best intentions.
And some of us have been to/through this rodeo before a time or two. Learning from "elder"pedes helps as well; other benefits include: not starting off at square one on everything, gives perspective, evens the keel, and speeds things up. More winning too.
As long as we didn't get beaten off. That'd be weird.
LOL.
People downvoting you have to learn to deal with reality. Yesterday was not a particularly good sign for our chances at the SCOTUS. Getting 17 states to join in today probably helps. It's hard to say how much. If they had all 46 remaining states, the deep staters on the court probably wouldn't care either way.
Yesterday was literally nothing. There's basically zero chance or reasoning for injunctive relief. Injunctive relief is when you ask the court to stop someone from doing something because you are alleging harm prior to hearing the case to determine if there is harm or not.
For example, if I am dumping some sort of questionable trash on my land and my neighbors might ask for injunctive relief because they are suing me and if it turns out what I'm doing is damaging my neighbors then it's better that I stopped sooner. Therefore the court orders an injunction forcing me to stop until the case gets decided.
It's pretty impossible to allege a damage to the president worthy of injunctive relief when no matter what happens he is still president for another 40 or so days. So when you consider that nothing actually happens until Jan 20th and until then anything can happen there's really no need for injunctive relief.
Yeah there is the safe harbor date but the court knows that isn't really a thing.
What was bad about yesterday. All they did was deny the emergency injunction. They are still hearing the case.
Any time the MSM can spin it as a loss for Trump they do (and then some). Gets tiring.
I don't get it. I may be slow.
It's ok, we still love you.
We weren't beaten yesterday either. Did you doom yesterday? Why? That was stupid. Nothing bad happened.
I read into it that he was saying that we (meaning a significant portion of the MAGA faithful), took an emotional blow based on some understandably confusing news. I get it. Anyone who suggests that they're aware enough of all of the nuances of the myriad things going with this fight and has been able to keep 100% up-to-date and never suffered an emotional letdown moment is likely heavily medicated, retarded, or not as informed as they believe they are. If they're none of those things, then they're the rarest of Pepes. It's hard not to react emotionally to what appears to be bad news, it's a reaction. That being said, there's way too many doomers dooming here. Those aren't the people innocently misunderstanding some of those nuances and then apologizing and accepting correction from the community, it's the ones making bold proclamations and drawing conclusions from their ignorance and trying to convince others to that effect.
Sorry I wasn't paying attention...are we beating off?
Jeffrey Toobin has entered the chat
I am. I just disagree, but your reading comprehension is iffy.
Be well.
Did we live the same day yesterday? Because I thought yesterday was a great day for us.
For me the gut punch yesterday was mostly the stickied "Texas is on their own, no other states are backing them up" disinfo thread.
Well for what it's worth, that shouldn't be a gut punch or change anything, because the merits of the case are the same whether it's just Texas or all 50 states. SCOTUS rules on legal merits, not by taking a vote for how many states will sign on.
The content of the case determines the winner, so one state is perfectly fine.
That's true, but cases are being tossed with alarming ease by activist judges and I think having more states on board will increase scrutiny and visibility and maybe make that a little less likely. Just sort of makes it feel more legitimate and not just like some kook in TX throwing a Hail Mary.
Yes that is exactly what that supposed legal expert was posting everywhere on that thread last night. he was really and in my bvew intentionally trying tp discourage positive efforts.
Indeed. It was annoying as hell.
The cavalry is here, and there's more to come.
Ya yesterday was weird.
Whoa, what about swallow-well?
There was a picture of him with a Chinese girl allegedly acting as his girlfriend (who also apparently swallowed well) but turned out she was a Chinese asset.
Well, the lid blew off of that yesterday and today, so he's now making the talk show circuit claiming that it's all a complex lie to tarnish his good fart-holding name.
It would've been funny if he had banged the hell out of her and enjoyed himself thoroughly while feeding her completely fake disinfo the entire time so she got nothing of value at all, just lies that led her handlers on time-wasting/resource-wasting wild goose chases.
You're thinking like a conservative. Democrats are too stupid.
Swalwell was having sexual relations with a Chinese agent for 6 years and the feds caught him. The story blew up yesterday, and he just got kicked off of the House Intel Committee today.
Really? Now thats wonderful as well!
No clue I'm here for that as well!
I like you!
Winning.
Still not tired.
Best part of a Trump administration: every day is better than the one before.
Why do you think youtube and soon to be others are gonna blocks anything except biden winning....they have to protect the narrative
That dang pendulum still swings up close to the observation box! REE
Chopper blades start to rotate slowly
Donβt worry the free chopper rides take some time get up to speed
Turbine engines don't start on a dime, ya know...
π
π€Έπ€Έ
π€Έ
ππππππ
Not high enough!
Put some sharks in there!
WHOA! John Eastman? Counsel of Record? SUPERSTAR. Damn!
Elena Parent on suicide watch.
lmao she tried for a 'gotcha' moment and asked if he was a member of the Georgia Bar.
"No"
Her (thinking she got him): "OK"
"But I am a member of the Eleventh Circuit Bar which has federal jurisdiction over Georgia, and I am a member of the Supreme Court Bar."
Fuckin' burn lmao
He shoved his diction straight up her fucking juris.
You can take that juris my diction crap and cram it up your ass!
Found this clip if anyone else wants to see the glorious smackdown this pede is referencing:
https://twitter.com/goldstuart/status/1334731465234538498
I do, thank you pede.
Wow, I like the pause just to let her feel good about herself before he donkey punches her. This bitch is maybe the second most stupid I've seen in any of the hearings so far. One would think she would do a little research. These people are on a list presented in advance.
I haven't heard the term 'donkey punch' in a while. Thank you.
Thanks fren!
Bless you
shaking in straightjacket intensifies
Elena--eyes darting--very, very insane.
https://i.maga.host/GbY6TRB.gif
Hilary Clinton has entered the chat
I hope the very convincing argument against Dominion she made a couple of months ago is played in court and helps secure convictions. Maybe even her own! π€£π€£
Eh, I'm sure she always has been. That bitch is unstable
He looked sharp last week.
John Eastman is THE GUY you want on your team when arguing a matter of constitutional law. He is more of a scholar than Sidney but equally effective. D A M N!
He was amazing and after listening to his testimony I said to myself "why on earth isn't this guy a part of GEOTUS counsel"
Topkek!
Magical reference.
I recognized his name right away. Dude is based. I loved that when I search his name to make sure I was thinking of the right fella the only thing that popped up was a smear article that he is a Kamala Harris birther lmao. This fuckin' timeline.
Who dat
Apparently some law professor. Son of showbiz attorney Lee Eastman who worked with Paul McCartney as a solo artist after suing to dissolve The Beatles partnership. And his sister is Linda McCartney.
just that Trump is a part of the suit
Trump has the best suits, and wears the best suits. Believe me.
You love to see it.
Everybody knows. All the other suits are crap.
I love you guys. Humor in the face of chaos.
Keeping a high morale is the most important part of a long, turbulent battle.
This is why we use humor and also deport the doomers.
Yes this is big because evidence can be presented in this case by Trump or any of the other states listed. If SCOTUS was asked to review any case from the states they would not have been able to add any new evidence into the lawsuit and a lot of the lower courts dismissed a ton of evidence already.
This is most likely will be the biggest court case of our life time.
one of the biggest in the history of our country
A key point:
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
It's a federal election as specified in the Constitution.
So per law, it really isn't a question.
It will be ok to delay the election, and even inauguration, to make sure we expose as much of the Democrat &RINO cheating. you know it will be ok to delay, because, Covid (#ChinaVirus)
Thank you! Holy shit! Wow! preplanning my popcorn menu w00t!
But also this is THE case
As above, youβre saying all the right things for me. Lol thank you!
it also means you're beautiful.
π³ Did you just pede-style find me? Or is this a standard reply? Haha i need hacker skills. For real.
I'm a smooth operator.
Two finger eyebrow slick
Care for some fat free greek yogurt?
πππ those are some sweet moves. Thanks, but I prefer my yogurt w full fat. Ha! π
I was just trying to be health conscious :/
Lol.
I prefer the full fat stuff as well, but I don't eat it enough for it to be a problem. Remember, there is no magic bullet. Eat right exercise everything in moderation.
It was expected
Daddy has entered the chat
Bush v Gore included Bush and Gore
Yes. Presidential Candidates still have rights
Joe Biden has the right to remain silent. Anything he says will be used against him in a court of law.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/uoKBFBprWzzc/
Yes, because the suit directly affects them, as they're, well, candidates to the election, and the outcome of the election affects them.
good or bad thing?
Trump has intervened because he has an interest in the outcome of the states. He has alleged one count of the violation of the Elector's Clause, which is a repeat of the TX claims, but from the perspective of POTUS.
It "means" that the opposition has more fronts to fight. It means that SCOTUS has more arguments to consider.
And based on other comments, more evidence can be presented.
In haiku form:
I WON BY A LOT
JOE BIDEN SNIFFS LITTLE KIDS
DEMOCRATS ARE DOOMED
I enjoy haiku
Bill Clinton is a rapist
Infowarsdotcom
He should have sent just one page and had only that on it
I don't speak legaleze either.
Would Trump be able to utilize his declassification authority and present classified evidence to the court??
Probably but this case really doesn't require it. It's a purely constitutional case which is impossible without being cucks for the court to ignore because it's extremely clear in these 4 states the federal constitution and in some cases their own state constitution was violated.
Eli5?
Trump is asking the Supreme Court to be made a plaintiff along with Texas.
As a candidate for the office, impacted by the lawlessness of the four states.
As a resident of one of the lawless States, I agree! It's statewide, not just 2 Counties. Mailing everyone ballots happened in a lot more States, too.
Making an election FUBAR is in the playbook of a color revolution.
Yes, but have you tried residing in a PO Box?
They are the smallest of tiny houses
Lol
As a resident of one of the lawless States, I agree!
It is mainly in 2 counties, Democrats&RINOs target the counties with the the greatest population, that is where they can add/change the most votes. They have an interest in those counties staying shit-holes so good people don't want to go there to participate in elections.
IT is essential to remember they cheat in so many ways, it is not just mail-in, it is also people voting multiple times, counting single ballots multiple ballots, destroying ballots, switching votes in counting/voting machine software, ballot harvesting, and more and more and more. We need to expose all of it, as much as we can it is HUGE Democrats cannot win half their state or Federal elections with out cheating. HALF, think about that. Half as many in the House, and Senate, and Governors, and State legislatures. President Trump is burning them to the ground.
I hope you are right with that last sentence. I'm saying that they're only going after a small part of the fraud, due to the obvious time constraints. It'd be really nice to have the actual landslide a matter of record.
The also target the most population dense, high crime areas because it is there where they can recruit the most helpers out of a high population of the usual suspects.
They are corrupt, they keep those areas shit-holes, so good people will not want to go there and work elections. They exploit the poor and the weak, just the opposite of what the maga movement does, and we are a movement.
As a lifelong resident of this lawless state of mine, I agree!
And he does NOT need to prove that there was fraud. Read this:
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
and I expect they will refuse him, which would be good for him so no blackpills tomorrow if you hear they punted him.
reasoning here: https://thedonald.win/p/11QlYYx4Dp/x/c/4Dqd13FYZIC
What does this mean for people that don't understand judicial things?
This is the only way to submit new evidence to SCOTUS.
Trump gonna play the whole deck of cards.
Dems fucked.
Pls baby jesus be right. I feel it deep in my bones. Its like my ancestors prepared me for this moment. Its a deep feeling unparalleled. And Ive got a feeling weve got this. Truth is on our side. We are just waiting for the massive redpill to get the masses
Yes. However the issue is this.
Color Revolution.
The baD guys know this would happen and will exploit and tear this country apart
The country is already torn apart. Buy ammo. Weβre going to need a lot of it.
Just tell me where to show up
Thatβs why weβre saving the Insurrection Act.
Bingo bongo booongo
Either way it is inevitable. Letβs give it to them and start dopping bodies. Just waiting for that βgoβ time.
Roger. Waiting orders
Precisely! Trump can even declassify information if need be.
Yes, but he does NOT need to prove fraud. This excerpt makes this crystal clear:
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
Bingo!
Trump will win.
He has a lot of cards.
Yea but why not both?
He's got cards that no one has seen. Holy shit they're going to be good cards.
OMG I am so excited!!! this was SO worth the past 4 weeks of angst
It means this: https://youtu.be/o1tj2zJ2Wvg?t=34
I more than half expected to be Rickrolled here. I'm a little less than half disappointed that I was not. :)
Rickrolling went out when we stopped doing this stupid bullshit.
You delivered better than the United States Postal Service on and after election day!
Now that's my language
THE MADMAN.
Ladies and Gentleman, THIS ABSOLUTELY BATSHIT INSANE POTUS has reached level 1,000,000,000,045! THERE ARE NO BRAKES ON THE TRUMP TRAIN!
COATS FOR EVERYBODY! BUILD THE WALL! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, AGAIN!!!
ILLEGAL VOTES HAVE TO GO BACK
FRAUDULENT STATES WILL BEND THE KNEE
BIG TECH PREPARE TO BE BTFO
These comments are dripping with that 2016 energy that brought us home the first time.
Itβs H A P P E N I N G
QUAD BRICK FOR MAX DAMAGE
WALL JUST GOT 10 FEET TALLER
JACK AND ZUCK ON SUICIDE WATCH
DONβT FORGET THE BRICKS! EVERYONE GETS A BRICK!
John Eastman -- world's expert on U.S. constitution --- counsel of record!!!!!!
what does that mean? please explain kindly.
John Eastman is a well-known top U.S. constitutional lawyer, who is representing Trump in this matter as counsel of record -- stated in front of the PDF linked in the post title.,.
Background:
https://vidolamerica.org/sharron-angle/
John Eastman CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE
Founding Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence; Claremont Senior Fellow
https://www.claremont.org/leadership/
you're a gentleman. Thank you.
You're welcome!!
Sekulow is brilliant and fast talker.
Eastman is more seasoned on specifically the constitution.
Tag team at SCOTUS??
In 2000 tag team, Ted Olsen (wife died on 9/11) representing Bush was not very effective on his feet, while the Tallahassee based (Democrat !) lawyer representing Bush at FL SC and then at SCOTUS, Barry Richard, was excellent.
Any questions about 1956, when I wore an I Like Ike button to junior high, or 1964, when I walked neighborhoods in Santa Monica for Barry ?? :)
I was a volunteer for Sharron Angle in her 2006 primary run for House vs. Dean Heller, and in 2010 for Senate (primary and then general vs. Harry Reid). She is a constitutional warrior, eventually winning against her own NV legislature, governor and state SC !!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharron_Angle#Nevada_Assembly
https://vidolamerica.org/sharron-angle/
After she won GOP primary in 2010, she went to visit Mitch McConnell in DC. She told me later that Mitch had told her, "I can WORK with Harry Reid!"
Mitch is total swamp creature.
A lot more. This guy is top of the line on constitutional law.
"I'm not locked in here with you, you're locked in here with me!"
Kek
Brilliant strategy so far... Play the "fraud, fraud, fraud" card, which of course enormous amount of evidence, but they knew it would be "denied" by the left. Then drop the "this is unconstitutional" card, cause the left has not read The U.S. Constitution and does not know how to defend their illegal election doings.
Yep. The left can't read the Constitution because they wipe their ass with it.
...and because it's written in cursive.
Dats a spicy meatball !
π€£π€£
so does justice roberts...but luckily we have 5 justices who are super anal about the constitution
More akin to a vampire in the light. It burns their communist eyes.
I almost suspect the Powell (who is from Texas) and Rudy show was intended to bring attention to the unavoidable political controversy so that the real straightforward legal effort, TX v PA et al, could move in for the kill without the stink of that controversy.
Powell and Rudy ran the circus not caring that a court wouldn't even listen, they just had to get it into the public, which they did. The TX court makes reference to the fraud shown in the Powell Rudy cases, but without making any direct focus on the fraud.
The way the Texas suit is written, Texas can prevail without even ever mentioning any fraud whatsoever.
100 percent this. It provides us with the material to explain why it's ok to our democrat loved ones who are about to be blindsided.
I have a deep blue cousin that moved to AZ and on election night was so happy that AZ voted blue. She's going to be devastated when she learns that her beloved party cheated. Rudy and Sydney provide easily accessible material to send her, and to help explain how this could have happened.
This would make sense! Remember that Rudy said he skipped the courts and went straight to the legislatures to show the evidence. This may have been why!
Powell and Rudy redpilled the public and also the state legislatures.
If SCOTUS says that the election falls to the state legislators, it is absolutely essential that they have the support necessary to elect Trump.
Their job is co-equal with this Texas lawsuit.
wUt iS cOnStiTuTiOn?
Who is the hacker known as Constitution?
Just some old guy the Left pays attention to any more. We should issue a Silver Alert.
The legal loophole known as "The Constitution".
It keeps guns in the hands of potential criminals, allows suspects to talk to lawyers and also to not talk at all...
It's a historic relict, really, and has no place in modern society.
The only reason we keep this curiosoty around is that it also enables us to create pornography, bash religion, kill unborn babies and make other people pay for our healthcare.
Every twit tard claiming to be a lawyer so far seems to have no idea what the actual law is. There was a law professor that I easily could debunk in about 5 minutes of reading if I wasn't twitter banned.
Damn fucking right something is deeply amiss.
This line is a gem.
Definitely one of the best, but that whole section is exquisite.
Take their coats!
TWO COATS
They are turncoats after all.
throwing in a little dig about obama losing voters in 2012...i love the troll master
Was this from the suit or from somewhere else?
From the suit. Page 8 of the Intervention under the heading, BILL OF COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION. That whole section is tasty as fuck.
I amiss having fair elections. Not since Reagan's landslide of 49 States. I want my 410! That map is beautiful, and likely honest.
Nah America has changed for the worse
That 410 EC map SHOWS America changing for the worse!
So theyβre saying theyβre joining the case too? Along with
Amici curiae are the States of Missouri, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia.
β-
Am I reading that right?
He's almost factually correct. Missouri is officially part of the case, none of the others are. Yet.
Everyone is pointing to "additional counsel" on the filing as "proof" the additional states have joined the lawsuit, but that's not what it means. It's the AGs who have filed amicus briefs. I was just reading about it, it means they can drop out, if needed or by choice, and it doesn't impact the case and the judges don't have to allow them to drop out.
Becoming part of the lawsuit, as a lawyer of record, is what you're looking for, and only one state so far has - and it's from what I can dig up, premature for states to join the suit, as this is a pleading for the court hear the case. Once that's set in motion, it makes more sense to intervene and join in.
But pedes will keep repeating the wrong things, because that's how it works here - and anywhere else, really.
Are you sure itβs not βAktuallyβ
They may not have "Joined" the case but the 17 added states have information that is pertinent to the case.
An amicus 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. The phrase amicus curiae is legal Latin.Β
So basically yes they did join the case as witnesses for Texas
Hey, found the other guy that can read! I was beginning to think I was the only one.
^^HEY, PEDES! HERE'S YOUR ANSWER^^
This. Motherfuckers thinking Amicus is just a #metoo moment are fucking stupid.
Thanks! This is actually helpful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
At the bottom. The final two pages of the suit:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163215/20201209144840609_2020-12-09%20-%20Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20-%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20Missouri%20et%20al.%20-%20Final%20with%20Tables.pdf
What about all the entities he listed?
Those are the Amicus brief filers.
You're either misinformed or you're making a semantic argument. Which are you? A shill or a pedant?
I donβt think you know what shill means. Iβm not here trying to sell stuff
1 minute ago:
15 minutes ago:
Oh?
Are you sure itβs not βAktuallyβ
PEDES - The other 17 or 18 states did NOT join the suit. They submitted Amicus Briefs - meaning basically that they are showing support and may offer evidence. Trump's motion to intervene means he is asking to join the suit as an actual party (in this case, another plaintiff in addition to TX).
I take it Trump is saying that, as the Republican Party Candidate for president, he was directly harmed by the lawless actions of the four states in question (GA, MI, PA, WI) so he wants to join Texas in suing those four states.
Texas is saying that since those four states refused to follow the law during the election, they therefore invalidated Texas's election, too, since Texas (supposedly) DID follow the law during the election. That's why Texas is suing those states.
The other states listed, who filed Amici Curiae briefs, are not part of the suit (at least, not yet.) They are just saying, "Yeah, we be frens of Texas and we think they are doing the right thing by suing so Go, Texas!" But it's still a very good thing because this show of support will make it waaay harder for SCOTUS and Congress to ignore the case.
In other words:
It's like a tournament between 50 players where you find out four teams were cheating. That invalidates the tournament for EVERYONE because the other 46 players did not get a fair chance to win.
It's a weird thing, but keep in mind, voter fraud was at issue in 1960 as well (Texas and Illinois). That's likely not why it's in there, it's most likely a mistake...happens more often that we'd like to think even with awesome lawyers.
What is the advantage of Trump intervening as an actual party versus just supporting the Texas team?
I believe that he will be able to submit additional evidence,
Guessing he will be also be able to examine the defense evidence just like the plaintiff.
I would think they are wrong. If Trump is added it doesn't change that only SCOTUS has jurisdiction in state disputes.
Hi, is this a good move or a poorly timed move? Everything pointed towards Texas having this on lock, so do they even need GEOTUS to get involved?
Right, they did not join the suit, but Amicus is significant and it shows they support the position and have what they feel is legitimate and compelling input related to that support. It's not just a random 'hey guys, me too" thing that has no meaning (especially when it's filed by several parties directly impacted by the EXACT claims made in the suit). Correct?
big progress cause that means he can show his evidence to the supreme court
WOOT!
Very nimble navigator!
N I M B L E
Dad has entered the chat
winning argument right here
Done without the consent of the citizens of the state as well.
Weβve only been warning the Democrats for MONTHS about this...
You see, democrats are very low IQ and low information. They never can think more than in the immediate.
Leave, in this case, is another word for permission.
By your leave sir (tips top hat)
One of my favorite things to do to new lieutenants in the Army. Literally no clue what to do with that one except pull a stupid face. Extra special if they're carrying something and drop all their shit saluting back.
You don't make them put it down, stand at attention to salute, then pick it back up again? Like a parade of senior officers trickling through a room making everyone drop everything every 2 minutes
For experienced LTs, yes. Fresh butterbars usually just react to the salute and go total yard sale.
It means he wants to leave the WH to focus on this lawsuit because it would be more fun.
Just kidding :) You got the correct answer
In before 17 people read only the first half of your post and then jump off a bridge.
I don't know why they can't just write lawsuits in everyday English. Instead of "seeking leave":
"How 'bout y'all let us get in on this?"
Because then we wouldn't have to pay them $400/hr.
That's how they practice law in Joggerville
Probably just to look smarter than the normies outside the field. I was in the medical field once and was constantly reminded that I had to use medical terms. Whenever I said "heart" or "liver" my superiors insisted that I should have said "cardiac" and "hepatic", even though that's the same thing.
It's called legalese not lawlis...you know what, fuck it.
Just gotta read you federalist papers yearly around Christmas to stay fluent
seek leave = asks permission
It's legal terminology. Means "permission."
He's asking to be made a co-plaintiff with TX in his individual capacity as a candidate for re-election. it's Trump and TX against the 4 states, if the court grants the motion.
This is no longer Trump's fight. This isn't about Trump. This is about America. Trump just exposed the enemy to us, for us to see. But everyone has to fight. Get the rest of those beautiful red states in the fight too.
Which is what Trump has been about since day 1
We have already crossed the rubicon. Trump just kicked in the door to Rome and peed on everything to establish dominance.
I would say that crossing the Rubicon better describes every other legal effort failing which cannot happen until 1/6, and then legally assuming power indefinitely under emergency powers. Scary that it exists but in that case, it'd be the best way to save the Republic.
Ahhh yeah! I'd like to file a motion asking the court to compel Joe Biden and Camel Harris to kiss President Trump's ass live on YouTube.
I fckin loled HARD
Haaa!
I second that motion!
We should be able to free up a lot of money for that. Take it from money earmarked for Planned Parenthood, the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and CISA. All aforementioned programs have too many redundancies to count and may be terminated immediately.
Oh boys Iβm so ready for this.
please save california!
***Just spoke to a woman at Wyoming AG office, she said the AG is highly considering it, and is making a list of people who call and ask them to join Texas and other States in the SCOTUS!!!! All's she asked me for was My name and State I live in.
π¨π¨π¨π¨π¨Call them ASAP π¨π¨π¨π¨π¨
Wyoming: Bridgett Hill | 307-777-7841 or 307-777-7886 or 307-777-7977 | Web form: http://ag.wyo.gov/contact-us
I got right through on the SECOND NUMBER listed, no hold time, took me under 2 min..
Also same time Hunter released he is under investigation for tax fraud. Also a day after it came out China had a spy sleep with Swalwell with supposedly more Dems on the way. And that Canada invited China to do winter war games in Canada. A lot of dogs barking but which ones arenβt?
The Canada thing doesn't surprise me at all. It should, but it doesn't.
If you look really deep on the /pol/ archives (4plebs)....you'll find that coronavirus was already popping up on PCR's in Canada in October of 2019. Sure does make you wonder... "230605403"
That's MY PRESIDENT!
It's happening.
Can someone explain what this means please....
POTUS adding himself to the suit to increase the chances that the case is taken up by SCOTUS.
GO TRUMP MAGA 2020 FUCK THESE COMMIES UP
The fire rises?
DADDY: [ENGAGED]
I called and emailed my Attorney General here in Florida.
She is a Trump supporter, and I received an IMMEDIATE response email that actually spoke specifically about the Texas lawsuit.
It is nice to have a SAY in our government.... and be HEARD.
GO TRUMP GO!!!
A SINCERE "Thank You" to every one of you who called and emailed.
WE. MADE. A. DIFFERENCE.
MAGA!!!
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN IN IDIOT SPEAK?
Just pretend like the rest of us that we all have law degrees
Trump is a Plaintiff now
Everyone should read this:
Despite the chaos of election night and the days which followed, the media has consistently proclaimed that no widespread voter fraud has been proven. But this observation misses the point. The constitutional issue is not whether voters committed fraud but whether state officials violated the law by systematically loosening the measures for ballot integrity so that fraud becomes undetectable.
Excellent, thank you!
One of the allegations are that the machine switched millions of votes against Trump. If that is true, how is that discrepancy not caught in the hand recount?
I think Georgia did a hand recount.
Wisconsin did a hand recount. Sidney says 6 million votes across the country were switched against Trump by the machine. If that is true, why is that discrepancy between machine count and paper ballot not showing up?
To address some of the very common sentiments expressed in this thread...
The presence or absence of literal fraud is completely irrelevant. Now, you know, and I know, that there were massive amounts of it. But that makes no difference in this specific complaint whatsoever.
The Defendant states ran their elections unconstitutionally. It truly could have been the "most secure and fair election ever" as we hear repeated to us a hundred times a day in nearly every single form and fashion.
That would not change the fact that the election was administered in an unconstitutional manner.
Defendant states (one of which I reside in, to my shame) played stupid games. Now they get their "stupid prize" of having their Electors invalidated or replaced by their (Republican) State Legislators.
You have to give them credit for the attempt at subversion on the largest scale in our national history! But they've been caught dead to rights, and thankfully we have a POTUS and certain State officials who aren't backing down from their (correct) position.
Very well stated. You're absolutely right on.
NOT ONLY were the acts of the Governor's and other high level NON-Legislative officials unconstitutional, they ALSO had the added bonus of covering up almost ANY instances of fraud that came as a result of those unconstitutional acts.
Joe Biden may have received, like, 500 fraudulent votes. Maybe President Trump did too! Maybe all instances of fraud were made by individual citizens and had no bearing on the result.
OR
Joe Biden could have received the luxury of TENS OR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of votes that were either completely manufactured, or that were through various methods subtracted from legitimate Trump votes and put into the Biden column.
We have very little chance of ACTUALLY finding out with any degree of certainty or scale.
Oops! Golly, gosh... Yeah, well, that's just how we decided to hold our election this cycle. NO WAY to possibly get to the bottom of any questionable discrepancies though. We've shredded all the envelopes, reset the voting machines, and lost our chain of custody records. GEE, AW SHUCKS! That's just the way the cookie crumbles, eh?
It took me a while to understand why him joining the case would be of any use... but it's because it allows TWO arguments to be made and not just be a matter of States' rights and interests but also of Trump's rights and interests, so there are now two paths to victory in argument instead of one.
We're in a war and many of you are still listening to the propaganda of the other side. Of course it's demoralizing. That's the purpose. Tune out of that shit. There will be ups and downs every day in the battles. Some will be lost. But we will win the figurative and literal war. But you have to hang in there and stay strong. MAGA!!
The realization that this was a Trojan Horse just floored me. This is freaking huge! Trump will be able to present to the courts all the evidence that the lower courts have denied him. Jeez. Wow!
Not a lawyer. But from what I gather from the rest of the Pedes, and a few lawyer Pedes, it seems that because he hasn't been able to present any evidence at all in the lower courts (not by merits of the allegation) it will be like presenting the evidence for the first time to a judge. This was a brilliant move because if say, he was able to present evidence in lower courts and judges ruled against them by actual merits, then this process would've been drawn out and litigated through appellate courts and would never see the light of day.
What we need are 500 more people to post βwhat does this meanβ without scrolling at all.
This is heating up. woW.
What does this mean for the suit?