We have only a few options when it comes to organizing together right now. We have effectively two "main" political parties, but neither of them in their current state are representing us. We need to collectively make a decision on how to approach these parties and how we wish to represent ourselves in the future if we wish to make ourselves heard loudly instead of being drowned out by manufactured choice and fake consent.

The options I can immediately see are: Making a New Party, Party Conversion, No Party (Establish as Movement), and Do Nothing. YOU DECIDE THE PATH TAKEN, though actions and through inaction. Below are pros/cons that I could think of. If you cannot DECIDE, then spell out what you need, or suggest a better idea that will result in a DECISION.

Making a New Party:

• (+) Clear separation and control of our message, financing, etc versus the establishment in existing parties (+)
• (+) Potential to consume and overtake a party entirely in time (Uniparty has idea and leadership stagnation)
• (+) Removes some methods of cheating if the new party becomes large enough
• (-) Semi-immediate need for charismatic leaders (household names are not made overnight)
• (-) Financing will be difficult without a well-vetted message, set of ideas, and detailed plans to accomplish them within our political system.
• (-) Requires a LOT of trust, integrity, and scrutiny in those who want to step up to the plate
• (-) Uniparty will do everything in their power to make the New Party appear to be irrational, radicalized, fringe, racist, or any other adjective that results in PARTY BAD programming. Forward-facing representatives will need to be on the ball to rationally counter this noise, articulate what we want to accomplish and see in a better America, and not give any ammo that could be used to tear the movement apart (including themselves).

Party Conversion:

• (+) Existing party is a recognized brand, carrying over brand loyalists as long as the name remains the same
• (+) Brand adopting/stealing (what Donald performed in 2016) can be done if you end up rising to the top (this will be more difficult now, but still viable with charisma).
• (+) Current leadership in both parties is stagnant; they are having trouble finding loyalist leaders who are also electable.
• (-) Establishment is directly in control of the party bureaucracy. All major owners over the process (party leaders, decision makers, accountants, etc) are selected carefully and they will do everything they can to maintain control (including allowing only themselves to "watch" the ballots).

No Party (Establish as Movement)

• (+) Clear separation and control of our message, financing, etc versus the establishment in existing parties
• (-) Semi-immediate need for charismatic leaders (household names are not made overnight)
• (-) Current "movement" efforts are hampered by media bombardments. Current media strategies are to take the poorest-communicating and most-radical of a group and make them the front page headlines. This needs to be changed, either by adopting spokesmen or
• (-) Movements only change hostile leadership through force of will (e.g. running unpopular leaders out of town in a majority-owned town)

Do Nothing

• (+) We all get to be lazy bastards, fighting "good fights" in memespace. Cons:
• (-) Uniparty maintains control, and we continue to live the rest of our lives in a two-tier justice system that will only get worse over time.

Things that will happen no matter what we decide:

• Anything we actively do gives an "excuse" to establishment for further cheating in favor of Uniparty. This should not be used as a basis for a decision. WE have to stop the cheating, and must recognize that they will do whatever is necessary for themselves to maintain control.

I don’t care if you’re on here to play this as the new 4D move, to doom harder than you’ve ever doomer, or if you’re seriously just confused. Give everyone the chance to catch up with the news first and a fair shake at understanding it before preaching which path you would have taken and why.

Trump’s Statement (Not on Twitter) https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-from-the-president-122720/

What’s This Impoundment Act All About? https://budget.house.gov/publications/report/impoundment-control-act-1974-what-it-why-does-it-matter

---

The Options Trump Had on a Poison Pill Bill:

Remembering your civics class, Congress has the most authority/power in government (and also carries most of the blame). BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS WANTED THIS BY OVERWHELMING MAJORITY. Trump had only a handful of civil options to take at this time, and none of them were going to be a win-win. I list the options that I believe he had to consider, but other creative / law-oriented peeps can discuss in the thread.

Option 1: Sign Outright

This is the “Give Up” Option. No one on here wanted this. The left would not have cared if we took this option (poison pill). It makes Trump look “nice” to those currently looking for any relief from COVID / unemployment, but it also signals a loss at a very bad crossroads for him.

Option 2: Veto Outright, Then Attempt Impoundment Afterward

This is the “Hard Line” Option. We wanted this, but the left would not have cared if we took this option (poison pill). This option gives a minor ideological victory for Trump’s base (us) that would have been overridden immediately by Congress by overriding the veto, and gives them headlines for days/months (CNN: Trump hates the Unemployed, See Why). It would have demotivated some supporters who are dependent on unemployment / COVID relief. It ALSO would have distracted everyone from Trump’s core arguments against the bill (vote on Section 230, increase funds to citizens, remove pork), which Congress would have dealt with behind the scenes.

Option 3: Sign, but Attempt Impoundment Afterward

This is the “Covert” Option. It demotivates some of the base (us) that are hard liners. It selectively delays the poison parts of the bill past Jan 20th (45 days), and disperses the good parts of the bill immediately. It also forces Congress to consider Trumps core arguments against the bill in the limelight instead of being able to distract behind the scenes through line item veto, delay, or as contingencies to pass.

Option 4: Allow Bill to Die and be Handled by Next Congress Before Acting on Above Options

This is the "Passive / Stall" Option. It tries to play the clock out for maximum effect by first letting the bill die before the next Congressional session. Then, Congress must re-introduce and re-vote on the bill, restarting the 10-day countdown at that time. The most likely option I could see would be for the new Congress to vote on the bill as-is with no amendments just to force the same poison pill decision above, but now a few days later and with no support for unemployment / COVID relief in the meantime. If Congress had real moxie, defectors could try to stall the bill, but I doubt that would happen with near unanimous support prior.

I believe it is important for all of you to at least be informed on the decision made and some options on what could have been done, regardless of where you fall on the support spectrum.

More than anything else, this should wake you up to the DISASTER that is our Congress and the fight we have ahead of ourselves as we make this a nation “Of the People” again instead of “For the Elite”.

Throwing this out there, but one of the major hurdles that I can see to getting organized with one main page is the sheer bubbling of traffic. We want to see the latest, and we want the latest stickies, but we also need to start aggregating and organizing information so that everyone is informed of their options (which is hard to do with lots of individual threads or 1-2 stickies).

Imagine having a separate post container that just has sticky / organizational pages that we could refer to, related to either the election as a whole or specific to the 6th rally/protest. With some moderation, this would allow us to coalesce / inform everyone collectively on static and developed information, so that new members can be brought up to speed quickly and existing members can refer back to info that may have been lost in the flow of traffic.

Just a recommendation, and hoping you all have a rockin' day.

It's time to get organized, Pedes. Mods, please consider making some super threads / stickies so we can all get on the same page. Some themes to consider are below:

Effective Messaging / Convincing the Convincable (Applied to Mailers and Calls)

• Short-and-Sweet / To-The-Point Messaging
• Be personable, show real concerns, don't force them to read/listen if they're unwilling or don't have time. If they want to listen, start with the strategic bombs that cannot be denied.
• Visualizing the Fraud / Scandals. Congressmen in bed with Dominion, Fraud logos, etc
• Asking the Big Questions. Where are the signatures? Why does Dominion machines favor Biden? Would you download an election? What happened from 4-6AM?
• Demand Accountability. No Accountability = No Election. No Justice, No Peace. Stop Ignoring the Evidence!

Disruptive Messaging / Shutting Down the Unconvincable

• Tie up the systems - Mail, long phone calls, email
• Demotivational messaging (attack their soul / character,
• Conversion from within. Targeting the actual reader / aide instead of the politician as possible convert, demotivate them to stop working for them, start convincing for us, or to give us information on the politican

In-Person Rally/Protest Planning Thread

• Coordinate hotel picks, travel paths to and from all destinations, backup routes.
• Verify that protesting occurs where there will be actual people to hold accountable.
• Plan for all eventualities. Stay peaceful if the correct path is taken. Get mad / disruptive if not. Stay on the verge if they are trying to play a waiting game. Consider playing by their own rules.
• Establish and maintain supply lines. These are essential for long-plays and middle-of-the-night decisions. The longer the game is played, the less-convincing any negative decision made will become.
• Contingency plans to shield attacked pedes and to disassociate the rally from potential rogue agents (shut down / arrest immediately, crowd distancing from event as signal that they were not affiliated, handoff to police while majority of crowd moves on)
• Make their enforcement plans as uncomfortable as possible.

Mailer Planning Thread

• Post all mail deadlines to land on and before Jan 6th. Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday need to be super busy mail days. The volume alone will scare them.
• Don't mail info-dumps for Jan 6th and expect them to be read, unless the goal is to spam their mailbox. If you want it to be read by someone instead of taking up space, send those in advance. By Monday January 4th, postcards and short letters may be all they have time to look through.
• Individual messages are more effective than chain letters. This is why Dems adopted postcard strategies (short and sweet, to the point, and volume lets them know how many are counting).

Encouraging Participation

• How To Help
• Lead By Example - Showing Your Support and Encouraging Others
• Keeping Your Cause Legitimate - Strong and reasonable figurehead, motivated supporters, communicating what you will and will not tolerate and staying to those lines

We all know Barr is an enigma. His lack of discernible action has been cast in the light for weeks/months now, so there are many interpretations of this action as removal (which isn't necessarily a surprise). What it means in full context, however, is still up in the air, which is why his letter bugs me.

I'm gonna barf out a few thoughts here, take it or leave it. All info here is a simple read into what's on the table, and does not prove or disprove anything. We will know the truth eventually as the future plays out, but in the mean time, some thoughts:

• There is a very significant change in voice / language used between pages 1 and 2. Jarringly so. I think they are two different authors. It is abrupt both from letter pacing and in prose used. Someone with a lot of time on their hands would have made page two far more eloquent and properly closing if this was thought out in advance.
• Barr uses Depart as the verb for his action. Depart is ambiguous and could suggest an ending or a beginning depending on direction. In addition, a departure does not necessarily suggest a breaking of fellowship. We know that he is moving away from his current post with the new acting and deputy, but only Trump and Barr know for certain and would likely be the only sources to spell this out for certain.
• "Blessed Holiday Season is in caps". This is not standard practice. Searching for BHS shows up with https://www.bulkhandlingsystems.com/ as one of the front page options. Interesting.
• "God Bless" is at the end, which is potentially redundant with Blessed Holiday Season. Again, both in caps, which is not standard practice. It can be used as a closing, but there are far more eloquent selections to be used.

Thanks for reading. Again, just wanted to get these thoughts out here, and take all of this with heaping mounds of salt. I just call things like I see them.

The strongest argument that I could find potentially convincing from the defendants came from the notion that it was "too late" to file. This argument uses a loose interpretation of laches to make the window of challenge very small, restricting challenge opportunities to a little over a year after passage of the law. They essentially state that "you could have filed against the June 2020 Election, but didn't, so too bad."

This argument makes an incredibly broad assumption, however. It assumes that TEXAS was knowingly injured or would have been injured at the November 2020 election during the June 2020 Election.

"The period of delay begins when the plaintiff knew, or reasonably ought to have known, that the cause of action existed".

Here's the kicker. Did Texas reasonably KNOW that its own self would be injured back then?

The injury caused was not an instance of knowledge and foresight. There were wild estimations on both sides in both directions. Everyone had opinions and indicators, but there was no reasonable way to KNOW the outcome of the election in June 2020.

While the possibility for those laws to result in the injury existed, it would not have been reasonable to know that injury would have taken place back then. It would have easily been possible for Trump to win outright in November 2020, for either candidate to bow out of the race, or for other factors to play in, resulting in no injury and thus no standing to make a case.

Laches applies AFTER an injury or knowledge of future injury has been OBSERVED. This is why workers in the 1950s and 60s were able to sue their employers as late as the 90s, because the actual damage was still hidden and there was no previous knowledge that it had occurred. On the other hand, a worker in 2015 who had been trained on exposure to asbestos and was exposed in the same year would likely fail if they tried to sue 10 years later for an asbestos injury and the incident was documented.

The argument of laches falls completely flat as long as Texas can reasonably demonstrate that it cannot forecast the election. The actual injury that TEXAS sustained was in November 2020, as Georgia's results affect the Federal result, NOT in June 2020 when Georgia's results solely affected Georgia's result and had no discernible injury to Texas.

Please feel free to critique and correct, as I'm just a layman here, but I wanted to wrap my head around this legalese to see if it was being wrongly applied.

Feel it, now?

A bunch of ding dongs have gone full zerg this election.

Acting single-mindedly, they pushed forward and left a trail in their wake.

Forgetful of their own actions, they leave their misdeeds vulnerable and digestible.

Obviously, ding dongs don't want to be held accountable, so let's fix that.

Inertia works against them.

They are open and exposed.

Bring forth everything posted.

Extract their deeds; make them known.

Go to every rulebook and see where they fail.

It starts local, peering everywhere.

No PAC untouched, no website unturned.

Slam down your justice, make them feel the burn.

Georgia's biggest decision of the night came when Fulton's election director called a supervisor and told them to keep counting, after previously telling most of the crew and practically all ballot watchers to go home for the night. Depending on the context of this decision, the director may have committed a crime by removing access from legally appointed ballot counters and changing the location / circumstances under which counting occurred.

For full transparency regarding this decision, we NEED to know the context behind this decision. We must DEMAND the phone logs and messages that the director had made that night to determine the full context behind this decision. As an elevated authority in charge of the counting process, we have the right to know what happened to make this decision, especially since doing so in the matter that was conducted failed to give due notice to legal opposition watchers. The director's messages contain the full context for the decision being made, and they had lied about the events of the evening already. The logs will tell.

There was a LOT of coordination going on amongst the poll workers working late at night, and they were pulling some shady practices by continuing to work after excusing everyone for the night. I think an examination of their call / message application logs is in order to determine WHY they were in frequent contact with each other before they started operations back up as well as determine if the shutdown was done maliciously (since we know by know that it was a lie).

Who knows, maybe more will be discovered in the process?

What was Sullivan doing for literally an entire month on Flynn's case? Anything that can be filled in to explain the gap?

9/29:

Judge Sullivan did not issue a ruling during Flynn's court hearing on September 29, 2020. He requested that lawyers file additional documents within a week of the hearing.

10/7:

Flynn's attorneys submitted court papers on October 7, 2020, requesting the recusal of Sullivan. The attorneys alleged that Sullivan held a bias against Flynn. According to USA Today, Flynn's attorneys said, "His [Sullivan's] continued presence in the case has become a national scandal undermining confidence in the impartiality of the federal judicial system and faith in the rule of law."

10/23:

On October 23, 2020, Judge Sullivan ordered the Department of Justice to certify the accuracy of all submitted evidence by October 26, 2020. In early October, the Department of Justice confirmed that it had accidentally altered evidence by forgetting to remove inaccurately dated sticky notes from FBI documents.

11/4: Complains about USPS handling of ballots.

11/25: Today's date.

Media stooges are trying to get these conflated to confuse the normie crowd, especially at a time when so much of this voting process has been botched this year, so I would like to take a minute and spell out the differences between two words: audit and recount.

An AUDIT is a systematic review of a process to ensure compliance with existing laws and standard practices. When someone cheats at taxes, they get audited. Auditing goes through everything related to a subject to ensure compliance or to tabulate problems and make corrective actions.

A RECOUNT is a repeat of a counting operation. If someone counts something wrong, a recount tries the same thing again to get a (hopefully) better result.

Knowing this, what do you think the People actually want to see? Spell it out here, and then demand your representatives to do what we really want them to do.