In Afghanistan, our troops had billions of dollars or logistics making sure they had water, food, and shelter. The second that, say, Knoxville, decides to think for itself, they all go hungry and thirsty, no electricity, NO NETFLIX. People will cave quickly.
Honestly a sad too many would be fine with CCP taking over so long as they still get to go to Disneyland once a year or look at expensive shoes all day on IG.
I was a cheese maker A CHEESE MAKER, but I am more than happy to make some good commies.
Nobody wants a civil war.... China would love to watch us rip each other apart. Next best thing to owning The Establishment.
He is, technically. This does not mean the election was not, is not, stolen, and does not mean it can't be overturned.
yeah, i don't get it. He watched a football game with military leaders. ok. Next.
"That's how they beat the living hell out of us across the country"... uh what? on the issue of police reform.
Context is everything. Why cut the recording off mid sentence?
It is. A statement showing the likelihood that the plaintiff will prevail is part of the procedural requirement for SCOTUS to grant leave (permission) to even hear the case.
China wants nothing more than to watch us plunge into civil war. Don't give in.
When you have the facts on your side, pound the facts.
When you have the law on your side, pound the law.
When you have neither on your side, pound the table.
This is the definition of pounding the table.
Yeah, but they never allow the constitution or law apply if they can use NSA data to blackmail a Justice.
Agree. Anyone can play with numbers. Why give them the open door. The focus is on constitutional violations regardless of the fraud.
Even Sotomayor is smart enough to see through this one.
Good breakdown.
Your takeaway is about what I expect: to try to harp on the issues of whether there was fraud as a trick to confuse away the real issues before the court; whether the defendant states' relaxation of state laws was a constitutional violation of electors clause - which requires adherence to those state laws, and if that violation then was a violation of equal protection and due process of TX voters.
The Dems, once again, will be forced to pretend their own double standards don't torpedo their own logic. They will use strict interpretation grounds to deny TX constitutional standing, but then won't apply those same strict interpretation grounds to avoid being required to adhere to the constitution's Electors Clause.
I am not surprised by the tone either. The Dem brief reply to Alito re PA also read like it was written by Twitter and not actual lawyers before a court of law.
If SCOTUS declares their voting process unconstitutional, the state legislatures could do one of two things:
- Elect Trump electors. Possible but not likely. The votes acquired through unconstitutional procedure, if negated, would give the tally to Trump.
- Elect Biden electors. Possible and likely. Swamp is swamp is swamp. And there will be enough pressure even in GOP controlled houses. Sorry if you find this too skeptical or cynical, but look where we are currently and ask how we let it get this far or if you'd be shocked.
- Send no electors. Possible and likely. Kick the can to Congress and let them sort it out. It's happened before.
No, they can still pick whoever they want. But if the court declares their procedures as violative of the US Const then those legislatures do so risking the political backlash that they are supporting fraud. So they could at the least chose to not send ANY electors which would result in both candidates getting less than 270 votes.
The mental decline is more rapid than we suspected.
This is old news. But still important.
Powell and Rudy, love em, but were not and are not the right lawyers to try these types of actions. They have made so many unforced errors.... but, and maybe by design, they are incredible sales people.
I am usually not a 4D Chess guy, but I have suspected this.
SCOTUS will not want to appear political or having decided who the POTUS is, so how do you separate the politics from an inherently political issue? You divide them, put one out as a "lightening rod" for the public to see, and then you bring another, the TX case, strictly on black letter law in a case that can technically be decided favorably without entering a single piece of fraud evidence whatsoever.
That's your post. And it is brilliant.
20,000 pages might seem like a lot, but in terms of litigation does not require much time to get reviewed.
That and I think it's more about they know more foreign spy connections with Feinstein are about to be exposed. The Swawel revelation was timed. And Feinstein is next.
Lol, exactly. Strategy? Objectives? Logistics? Naw man we just gonna kill us some commies and it'll all go back to normal because we're tough and shit.