Almost every single person in a high level position that Trump appointed has betrayed us. At some point we have to recognize the pattern. Sessions, Barr, Wray, Haspel, 3 SC Justices, the list goes on and on. About the only person worth a damn has been the SoS Pompeo, and what has he accomplished? Nothing but Pro-Israel shit between him and Kushner. So Israel made out great, what have we gotten?
I mean how much shit can we see with our own eyes before we believe the truth?
I can admit you might be right. I'm just seen so many grifters come over the years and backstab Trump that I'm just skeptical of the lot of them.
I particularly don't like loudmouths on twitter that seem to only want attention for themselves instead of being serious. That's why I'm skeptical of Powell and Wood any more.
We need SCOTUS to hear facts on the cheating and rule on it in our favor for the best possible outcome. They need to clearly acknowledge fraud and cheating so we can get past the MSM filters. I don't disagree with you.
I wouldn't be happy.
But something like 75% of republicans right now believe Biden cheated. No cities are burning (cept by Antifa).
I'm just saying theres a possibility thats what the SCOTUS reasoning could be.
Most normies aren't into this like we are.
Well if Trumps pulls the ultimate trigger I know which side I'll stand on. Keep calling state reps, try to get more people on board this case on our side today, I've called my rep, governor won't respond at all, he's a piece of shit.
Pray if you do that. Prepare for chaos. Prepare for the future in case.
I can be on board with what you're saying, I think SCOTUS going the way I laid out is more of a political path for them that they could choose.
However, almost any decision they make has no precedent, so you know, that's not very compelling one way or another.
What's done is done at this point. Its not like a twitter post or a .win post is going to affect how SCOTUS is going to rule.
But it CAN affect how we respond to this. We have been used by charlatans for months now, we have been lied to shit on lead astray and have rinos and swamp creatures stabbing us in the back for 4 years.
The media lies to us non stop, censors us, demonizes us and everything else.
At the very fucking least we should be strong enough to understand the importance of free speech, not just forced in a false lull into an echo chamber when we have many forces of evil against us.
For us to prepare properly and move forward we always must understand the truth when we're being lied to and lied about non stop.
And for the record, I support 100% TRUMP, I do not support Robert Barnes, I see him as a charlatan and a snake oil salesman out for himself only.
Well I agree that is the best outcome for us, but your arguments for why SCOTUS would go that way don't sing to me.
If they go this route, it also sets precedent and hugely intervenes in states matters. I agree they don't like to do this if they don't have to, but IF THEY ACCEPT THIS CASE AND IN ANY WAY SIDE FOR PLAINTIFFS, that is outright what has to happen.
There's no way they can take this case and rule for plaintiffs and not cause a huge stir. To agree with your argument we would have to both agree that SCOTUS wouldn't even hear the case to begin with, which we should know today I'd hope.
So yeah I would like to see this outcome, and its possible, but its just one of many possibilities. I don't necessarily think this one has a higher probability of what I laid out.
"The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed;"
whole number of Electors appointed is the key language. SCOTUS can say these states cannot appoint electors.
I agree that that is the best case scenario out come for us, and I hope thats what happens. Even then though, we would need SCOTUS to definitively say that there is fraud to give the rinos enough backbone to actually vote for Trump.
Even with this outcome its a huge uphill battle.
Yeah I understand that section.
The point is SCOTUS can do whatever the fuck they want. If they "block appointment", then they can say the 12th amendment requirement of a majority of "appointed electors" is not 538.
That language specifically is even in Trumps motion to intervene.
Barnes is just wrong. I don't trust any of these twitter charlatans any more, they don't care about Trump they care about making money.
Anyway, yes what he says is correct in a sense though. 12th amendment says if no one gets a majority it goes to the House. But its not decided by a straight house vote, theres a special way its done. The way it stands theoretically Trump would win narrowly, but that would require every red state to vote along party lines. That's what he's saying here.
However, that clause in the constitution clearly is referring to the possibility of 3 or more candidates. There's not any legitimate way of not getting a majority with 2 candidates unless you tie (which is possible, there's no case law that would dictate how that would go) or if you somehow allow votes to be cast but not counted, which SCOTUS can do here... BUT
The more likely scenario is if SCOTUS were to take this case, they could not allow these 4 states to appoint electors, and that changes the math. 270 is no longer the required number for majority, 239 is. Biden has that if nothing else changes.
Yeah maybe Robert Barnes should read this. SCOTUS can block appointment of the 4 states in the suit, which means 270 is no longer a majority since there isn't 538 electors. Only 239 is needed out of the appointed electors, and Biden would win if SCOTUS does that. Can see my other comment here if you want more details.
Barnes is wrong here, the guy is replying to has a valid legal argument that I was making here last night too. Its a serious concern.
Yeah well that would have been great about 5 weeks ago.