Sincerely,
Posted on 12/08/2020 5:15:06 AM PST by EyesOfTX
He is likely the least popular senator among his colleagues in the Senate, and there is a good reason why that is the case. That reason centers around the fact that Texas Senator Ted Cruz is never shy about challenging the status quo, or about upsetting the Senate’s country club atmosphere.
Cruz is a disruptor in the Senate, the uninvited guest to the wedding party who spikes the punch, turns over the bridal cake table or leaps in front of the gathered spinsters to catch the garter. He’s Vince Vaughn in “The Wedding Crashers” alongside Rand Paul playing the Owen Wilson part.
On Monday, Senator Cruz did it again, no doubt eliciting a heavy round of tsk tsks from the Susan Collins’s and Mitt Romneys of the world by tweeting that he’d be more than happy to present oral arguments to the Supreme Court in the Pennsylvania election case should the court decide to hear the case:
Cruz went on to say the following in three subsequent tweets:
Because of the importance of the legal issues presented, I’ve publicly urged #SCOTUS to hear the case brought by Congressman Mike Kelly, congressional candidate Sean Parnell & state rep. candidate Wanda Logan challenging the constitutionality of the POTUS election results in PA.
Petitioners’ legal team has asked me whether I would be willing to argue the case before #SCOTUS, if the Court grants certiorari. I have agreed, and told them that, if the Court takes the appeal, I will stand ready to present the oral argument.
As I said last week, the bitter division and acrimony we see across the Nation needs resolution. I believe #SCOTUS has a responsibility to the American People to ensure, within its powers, that we are following the law and following the Constitution.
[End]
For those who are not aware, Cruz has a strong history of arguing cases before the Supreme Court from his time serving as Deputy Attorney General in Texas. No one has any idea if the court will agree to hear this case or how it would rule if it does, but God Bless Senator Cruz for being willing to stand up while most of his cowardly colleagues are hiding in closets in desperate efforts to avoid taking questions from the press.
To think we almost lost this guy to Beto O’Rourke. Holy crap.
Well, this is a novel approach, at least. – Speaking of the Texas Attorney General’s office, current Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is using the office to join the crowded field of lawyers challenging the results of the November presidential election. He is taking a novel approach, especially when one considers that Donald Trump easily defeated China Joe Potato Head Biden in the Lone Star State, an outcome no one is challenging.
Per former Texas Ranger Roscoe Davis, Paxton filed a petition directly to the U.S. Supreme Court late last night, claiming that this direct appeal to the USSC is valid due to its standing as the original court of jurisdiction in disputes between states. Paxton’s reasoning, if Davis is accurately summarizing the case, is that the states of Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution and the 12th Amendment by implementing invalid changes to voting rules and procedures via the courts or executive orders. This would make sense to any common sense reading of the Electors Clause, since it gives sole authority to son the subject:
The end around case has been put together by TX AG Ken Paxton suing GA, MI, WI, and PA at SCOTUS. Bringing this case across multiple jurisdictions gives it a straight lane to the SCOTUS.
This happened just before midnight tonight, will post documents soon.
Texas approached the Supreme Court directly because Article III provides that it is the court of first impression on subjects where it has original jurisdiction, such as disputes between two or more states, this is hard tactics.
The Great State of Texas argues that these states violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution because they made changes to voting rules and procedures through the courts or through executive actions, but not through the state legislatures.
These non-legislative changes to the Defendant States’ election laws facilitated the casting and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.
Additionally, Texas argues that there were differences in voting rules and procedures in different counties within the states, violating the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Bush v. Gore 2000.
Finally, Texas argues that there were “voting irregularities” in these states as a result of these changes.
Texas is asking the Supreme Court to order the states to allow their legislatures to appoint their electors. If this is successful it opens the door for the next step.
The genius behind this is they don’t have to prove fraud, there’s no doubt there are “election irregularities” all that has to be proven is that they changed election laws by executive order and not by legislation as required by the US Constitution. Article II, Section 1 Clause 2.
All these Governors and Sec of States making these changes out in the open make the case pretty clear.
The Defense is going to claim it was a COVID Pandemic, mark my words, it’s all they got, it was their excuse for everything in every state.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 is really clear and there is no Pandemic clause.
Now when they start screaming Pandemic Crisis, all the libs that went out for haircuts and Napa Valley Dinners, and seen all over the media, claiming privilege, are screwed.
If you can go to the store, go out to eat, go get your hair done, do all the things the political elite were doing, while claiming lockdown and mask mandates, then you can get out and vote, no need for special circumstances!
Game set match.
The relief being sought has not only precedent (Election of 1836) it has constitutional verbage to back it up.
Not asking for the SCOTUS to throw out ballots, just follow the Constitution and the 12th Amendment of a Contingent Election.
[End]
All you folks in Georgia might want to pay attention to steps these Texas officials are willing to take to try to reverse what is a clearly fraudulent election result in your own state, and contrast it to the ongoing coverup being desperately implemented by your own Governor, Brian Kemp, and Sec. State Brad Raffensperger.
It is a very stark contrast indeed.
God Bless Texas.
That is all.
Looking forward to seeing Alabama, Florida, North and South Dakota, Mississippi, Arkansas, and other states that went overwhelmingly for Trump join in the action Texas is taking. The four states basically did nothing to remedy the fraud and corruption, so this is a good time to do this.
Paxton has been a strong Constitutionalist.
Well, hopefully you’re right this time, but let’s not ever forget what you wrote on November 6, 2020:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3902530/posts
“This is in fact Donald Trump against the world, and the reality is that the world is almost certain to prevail.
The stark reality we all face this morning is that Georgia was flipped overnight and Pennsylvania is almost certain to flip today, and once these states flip, there is precious little chance they will be flipped back...”
Mitt Romney says, “Hello”.
The Supreme Court has already Ruled on this issue and they ruled that the State Legislature can Reassert It’s Power to choose New Electors WHENEVER IT DAMN WELL PLEASES!!! See Bush v Gore
Fixed
I recently had an ignoramus here tell me that lawyers couldn’t possibly wonder what it is like to argue before the Supreme Court..especially while spending 3 years pouring over SCOTUS cases while in law school...having to prep for the hard ass law professor who loves the Socratic method who tries to make you look like a fool.
That poster called me childish for thinking that...but she was just being churlish.
I suspect almost all law students wonder at some point if they will ever have a case that takes them all the way to the Supremes. You frequently see lawyers say the one thing that would bring them out of retirement from practicing law is a chance to be heard before those 9 Justices.
Good luck, Cruz. Saw a Constitutional lawyer on twitter say she would gladly sit 2nd Chair in order to watch him argue the case.
I suspect there was plenty of cheating in many states, including Texas, where Biden lost by less than 7%. Too close for comfort. In reality, he probably lost by double digits, but if the cheating problem isn’t fixed soon, who votes won’t matter and Texas will eventually be counted as a Blue state.
Well, second least popular then. :)
[Mitt Romney says, “Hello”. ]
— When we look at those who said they are “not very strong” Republican, Romney rebounds a bit. Forty-five percent of these folks approve of Romney’s job actions, while 55 percent disapprove of him. ]
We all know what Stalin said, no need to even quote him here in this context.
Watching and praying... hoping that Justice ACB's presence on the court is by divine providence, if you know what I might mean...
I don’t know. I think Rand Paul isn’t too popular with the GOPe cadre. He would be second on the list if not first.
I think it’s pretty clear that the Trump team will go with someone who is already part of their team, or someone that is more specialized in the exact laws to be debated, as they should. Watching Lou Dobbs berate Stephen Miller at the top of his lungs yesterday over Miller’s refusal to instantly accept the thought of Cruz into this role wasn’t a good look.
I like Cruz a lot, and hopefully this gesture was more about actually wanting to help than simply attracting attention to himself. He should file an amicus brief, as some other Republican legislators have, if he wants to prove his legal chops. Else spend more time doing what is his profession these days, by making arguments on TV and on the Senate floor in support of the President.
Sincerely,
Ted Cruz is the only man in the Senate with a spine.
there is no one on their team that should argue before SCOTUS except Sekulow..the father.
Fox news headlines this morning aren’t even mentioning the Texas law suit. And Chris Wallace on Sunday tried to insist that Biden must be referred to as “President-Elect.” There is no such office, Wallace. It was a figment of Obama’s imagination when he first used it and Biden is a senile stand-in for Obama’s third term.
Biden shuffling out to stand in front of a fake “Office of the President-Elect” seal doesn’t make the phony office legitimate.
Fox should fire Wallace. He and the rest of the idiots in the Fox stable should be out on the streets looking for another job.
Based on simple notoriety, that is my thought as well. But even Sekulow seems to be playing second fiddle to others now.
cruz could be a Supreme Court Justice
Sekulow - no chance
So, Cruz is perfect for this...if he ever gets a chance. We will know this week.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.