UPDATE
As of 12/9/2020, the majority of the content of this post is no longer applicable. 18 states (inclduing Arizona) have now filled Amicus Briefs with the TX case, and president has filled a motion to join the case as well. THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!!!
The purpose of this post was a success. By pointing out to people that no state had yet joined the lawsuit on 12/8/2020, we ensured that everyone that could call, indeed did call, their AGs, Govs, and Reps, and demand them to join the lawsuit. Our work is not yet done, more states AGs must join the cause. Keep up the great work folks, make sure to double check your sources, and never hesitate to ask a pede for a source, especially if there's only a screenshot or a tweet from a random person involved
Trump 2020, let's fucking go
Post as of 12/8/2020 for reference.
-
No other state has joined the TX lawsuit. Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri AGs have released statements appreciating or supporting the lawsuit, but no state has yet joined the lawsuit. This could change, but for now, none has
-
SCOTUS has NOT accepted the TX case. The case has been docketed, just like the PA case had been docketed. SCOTUS has yet to decide if they will hear the case, while I do expect them to, they haven't done so yet.
UPDATE (update 7 below): Big update on this below. u/SellTheSun elaborates extensively on how this case is different from the Kelly filing, and what the aproximate timeline looks like. TLDR, we're likely in a better position than I initially made it appear, at least from a position of SCOTUS hearing or responding to this case in some manner.
- SCOTUS has not rejected the Mike Kelly PA lawsuit. Jenna Ellis says "The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert. @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court." This means that the merits of the case have not been rejected, and the case not only is still active, but can also be merged with the TX case. It can also not be, and the TX case can be independent. No certainties here.
Sources:
Louisiana's AG's Statement (supporting but not joining the lawsuit): https://www.kplctv.com/2020/12/08/louisiana-ag-throws-support-behind-texas-election-lawsuit/
Alabama's AG's Statement (supporting the arguments of the TX lawsuit but not joining it): https://twitter.com/AGSteveMarshall/status/1336435391403057156
Mike Kelly PA's docketed case: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html
See how Mike Kelly's case is DOCKETED on December 3rd. Doesn't mean that it was heard. Again, I hope, and honestly, expect, that SCOTUS will hear the TX case, but doesn't mean that SCOTUS will.
Update 1: From now on any new edits, I'll add as updates.
Arkansas AG says she will help TX case in any legal way she can. Hasn't joined the lawsuit yet either.
Source: https://twitter.com/AGRutledge/status/1336452654982160392
Update 2: Added a third point regarding the "rejection" of the Mike Kelly Case. Source: https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/status/1336451735150350336
Update 3: Ted Cruz has made a statement with respect to Mike Kelly's lawsuit lamenting on SCOTUS: https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1336467262975467520
IANAL so I'm not sure how this coincides with Lawyer Jenna Ellis, but for the sake of transparency, I'm adding it here to have everything in one place.
Going through the comments as rapidly as I can and responding. Saw the AG-Elect from Indiana supporting the TX lawsuit (but he's AG-Elect, so no authority yet right?). IDK, for reference, link is: https://www.facebook.com/ToddRokitaIN/posts/10158842063228252
Update 4: Front Page post https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTrBLmj/its-working-louisiana-to-join-te/c/ regarding LA joining TX lawsuit is bullshit. They released a statement, which if you actually read, says they support the TX lawsuit and already have their own lawsuit in the pipeline.
LA AG Statement: http://agjefflandry.com/Article/10825
Only the U.S. Supreme Court can ultimately decide cases of real controversy among the states under our Constitution. That is why the Justices should hear and decide the case [referring to an older case linked below] which we have joined representing the citizens of Louisiana. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court should consider the most recent Texas motion, which contains some of the same arguments.
That older lawsuit is: http://agjefflandry.com/Files/Article/10808/Documents/2020-11-09-RepublicanPartyofPa.v.Boockvar-AmicusBriefofMissourietal.-FinalWithTables.pdf
It appears to be solely against the events which took place in PA.
Update 5 -- taking a 75 mins break at 9:20 TT. Will be back in the evening to respond to as many comments as i can and keep updating as we find out and learn new information.
Update 6 -- Missouri AG says he'll support TX in any way he can.
Source: https://twitter.com/Eric_Schmitt/status/1336506935982624768
Update 7 -- The texas vs. PA et. al. SCOTUS case
u/SellTheSun is amazing. Catch the entire thread, so that you can follow along, and perhaps even ask clarifications on your own starting at https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/massive-disinformation-effort-on/c/4DqchljeYgF
Points made by u/SellTheSun:
- in regards to the PA case was an application for emergency injunction (and the injunction was docketed), (https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html) with the petition for a writ of cert pending. The case was not docketed since it has not been filed yet.
- In regards to the Texas case, not only was a motion for an injunction and temporary restraining order added to the docket, the case itself was added to the docket as well. (https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html)
- See requested timeline details in his comment (don't want to regurgitate his words): https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/x/c/4DqchqPArWT (we are currently 1 day behind from the TX requested timeline)
- Oral Arguments could be heard, it could also just go back and forth with briefs. But SCOTUS will certainly rule on the injunction in one way or another, and since the case was docketed, they (the TX AG + folks) are way ahead of where the PA Kelly case is.
I understand this may still be confusing. Please comment on the thread at https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/massive-disinformation-effort-on/c/4DqchljeYgF and page both me and u/SellTheSun so we can update as necessary.
u/SellTheSun, please tell me if I'm missing something or should clarify something further.
Update 8 -- An update from Jeff Landy, LA AG
In a FB comment on his statement regarding the TX lawsuit, Jeff Landry clarified that NO STATE can join the lawsuit until SCOTUS agrees to hear the case (which further clarifies that SCOTUS hasn't agreed to hear the case just yet -- follow along update 7 for a tmeline):
Other states are not able to join Texas until the court agrees to hear the case. Separately, I already put Louisiana on record on a different case on the same, or similar merits, weeks and weeks ago long before the Texas filing was made.
u/SellTheSun can correct me on this, but I believe Jeff Landry can still file an Amicus Brief in the TX case which he hasn't yet done.
Source: Jeff Landry, AG of Louisiana in a FB comment on this post: https://www.facebook.com/LandryforLA/posts/3694419443954498
I've broken this down into four sections: background & lesson, what the left proposes, preface to solution, and finally, the solution. Please take 5 mins to read this, I promise you it will be illuminating and you'll be armed with great knowlege to combat any idiot that ever mentions tuition-free college sponsored by the government again.
BACKGROUND AND LESSON:
Some of the older pedes on here may recall the days when they went to college. You could work a job every summer, and pay for your college: tuition, lodging, food, the whole nine yards, and come out with a degree and debt free.
So what changed, and how did we get to this stage, where people have to take loans that are so crushing?
One simple thing. In 1965, the federal government created the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program. Thank you LBJ, you cock sucking racist traitorous bastard.
Put very simply, the federal government started to guarantee student loans. Why? Because if you're, say lazy, and would not like to work to pay for college, you want to get a loan. But no bank or corporation in their right mind is going to give you a loan without any collateral. To alleviate this conundrum, the federal government said "OK, we'll guarantee these loans". Remind anyone of how something very similar led to a recession recently, that we still haven't truly come out of?
So you may be wondering, well this has to be a recipe for disaster. Indeed, it was, because, there was no limit on the amount that the federal government would really guarantee. Soon enough the universities caught on. And the banks caught on. And the sharks caught on. Upon the injection of government intervention and socialist ideologies, capitalism simply followed through.
You see, now the banks were willing to loan a student the money, because the federal government would guarantee it, and furthermore, the university can start raising the prices, because it's OK if you don't have the money -- you can just go and take a loan. Over time, the snowball effect kicked in, resulting in the situation that we face ourselves in today.
There was an additional, absurd, regulation that essentially disables a borrower from actually being able to default on your loans. You see, should you default on your student loans, the federal government will come after your wages. You will under most circumstances, NOT be able to truly default on your loans, and will have to keep paying the government back. The lenders don't give a fuck, remember, the federal government guarantees the loan, so they're gonna get their money either-ways.
WHAT THE LEFT PROPOSES:
The left, correctly so, recognizes the rising cost of college as a massive problem. Their solution, for a problem that the government created, is to increase government involvement by guaranteeing tuition free college for everyone, and to "cancel" all student loans.
I don't blame people, particularly young people, from being drawn into this proposition. Wouldn't it be nice to have your loans eliminated, and for those interested in joining college, to not have to worry about burdening themselves over such giant monstrous debt?
This is a horribly dangerous and malicious proposal.
PREFACE TO SOLUTION:
Let me preface this by saying while the right recognizes the absurdity of these proposals (After all, why should an 18-year old kid be able to enjoy a 4 year vacation package and fuck fest on the dime of the U.S. Taxpayer in order to "study" lesbian art history?), they don't actually put up a counter argument.
We saw this recently when AOC was going "oh free college bitches" and Betty Devos was like "bitch that's a socialist plan, fuck off". Fuck off is not good enough, you need to provide an actual solution. You won't, cause the entire establishment and the uniparty all benefit from this monstrosity, which of course, they created.
SOLUTION:
Rule 1 -- Eliminate the FFEL Program and stop the federal government from guaranteeing student loans.
Rule 2 -- Kind of a corollary. Pass a law making legalizing borrowers to default on their student loans (and consequently, make it illegal for borrowers to NOT be able to default on their loans).
Rules 1 and 2 will solve the problem from here onwards. Rule 3 will solve the problem right now.
Rule 3 -- Make rules 1&2 retroactive.
Let the free market capitalism take over and watch how quickly the problem the government created will be alleviated. Certainly, this need not be the only rules introduced. There might be additional rules that should be passed for land grant / federally funded and state universities such as Texas has, requiring 90% enrollees to be in-state, so you could carry that over federally and require 90% to be U.S. citizens, PR, and lawful residents. The United States of America should not be funding the education of foreign students to massive extents such as they are today. In fact, education, and more specifically, American universities should be treated as a national security assets. To that end, we must also ensure that these assets are not converted into indoctrination centers for the very ideals that the revered founders fought, bled, and died to free us of.
So next time some blue haired liberal mentions free tuition college, which sounds good, but doesn't work, you can clearly explain to them in 5 mins a significantly better solution, by explaining how the problem was actually created.
What I'm really hoping is that somehow I can reach someone like Dave Rubin, or Candace, or Roger Stone, or DJT Jr, or literally anyone one degree apart from Trump. I believe that the deal maker, GEOTUS, once this is explained to him in 5 mins, can easily explain this to congress and get it passed through the art of the deal. All I need is someone to read this, or talk to me for 5 mins who can talk to GEOTUS and get this idea into his brain.
Basically, why the 700k or so ballots need to be thrown out. My understanding was:
- The ballots weren't able to be supervised.
- They can't be audited because the envelops have been thrown out (or some other reason), hence they need to be thrown out.
Anyone have the source for all this?
Available for free with amazon prime at https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B08LMS5Y8Y/
A quarter of the way through, and it's systematically going over who the intelligence community fucked Michael Flynn, and setup Donald Trump.
