“Irrefutable Proof Is Coming Soon – We Are NOT Done” – Sidney Powell Responds to Supreme Court Decision to Ignore Election Fraud

Gateway Pundit ^ | February 23, 2021 | Jim Hoft

[RobertoinAL]

I think Sydney is under the assumption that America has any rules or laws that are upheld by government agencies.

[veracious]

May YHVH (God) be with Sidney and our other warriors.

[jmacusa]

Hey , lady, shut up!

[jmacusa]

Any day now... soon... yup... you’ll see....

[rxsid]

I applaud Mrs. Powell for what she is doing. It's orders of magnitude more that most.

The problem remains that the vast majority of our judiciary is compromised as are our politicians...including nearly every (R).

At the very least...she's trying to do something about the fraud.

[william clark]

Doesn’t matter if it’s irrefutable, if it’s consistently ignored.

[TBP]

If it actually shows up, will it make any difference?

If it hasn’t shown up by now, why should we believe it’s going to show up now?

[Fury]

Then what?

What You know, the MILITARY! They are going to help finish the smooth transition, expose the Biden body doubles, complete the martial law takeover, and get the quantum financial system going!

What? You don't believe any of that? So when did you stop taking ChiCom cash?

[dware]

Irrefutable proof is coming soon.

Yeah, right. I ain't gonna hold my breath. Quit talking about it and present the proof to the people. The courts are as useless as the GOP at this point.

[Fury]

It’s too bad as central_va has some very good ideas on manufacturing, etc. It just gets overlooked by the calls for secession and the generally rude behavior.

[Fury]

You should not make promises - you should just deliver. Or do not say anything.

I see you have not met Lin Wood.

[Carl Vehse]

The STCOTUS* has made it abundantly clear to the federal district and appeals courts that they are not interested in, no matter how overwhelming the evidence, overturning the fraudulent 2020 presidential election. And if these lower courts judges know what’s good for them they will follow the same course.

*STCOTUS = Supremely Traitorous Court of the United States.

[CtBigPat]

[zeugma]

I’d love to beleive this, but why do I feel this is just another money-grabing scheme to take advantage of the base.

I don't think it's just a scam. I think shes sincere, but the problem is, she still believes we can actually get Justice from what has devolved into merely a legal system. She's wrong.

Words mean things folks. I will never refer to it as a "justice system" again.

[Widget Jr]

Irrefutable proof means nothing when the courts are corrupt.

[Dr. Franklin]

Kraken is coming soon. Been taking a while now. I guess they are putting it all together. I wonder what the new proof is. I know fraud happened and we have seen videos of it. Would be nice to have this undeniable proof she is speaking of. Some things like the GA video. Even if it's to late. Let judges and people see this stuff.

For all of the pessimists here, allow me to attempt to explain the "inexplicable", and why proof of actual fraud, which Trump's team thus far had not litigated, is different from the certification of an illegally conducted election. These are two different issues, and any good lawyer can distinguish them. The layman might consider this "splitting hairs", but it is what lawyers and judges do all the time.

So, there was the issue of whether or not the elections were conducted according to the laws passed by the legislatures. Plainly they weren't, but six justices at SCOTUS apparently concluded that was a "political issue". According to the plain text of the Twelfth Amendment, the state legislatures have the sole right to appoint the electors. None of them exercised that power, so they implicitly agreed with the slates of the electors certified by the governors. Of course, no state legislature has used the power to choose the presidential electors in over a hundred years, and none want to be labeled as "undemocratic", but for the "textualists" at SCOTUS, or those looking for an excuse to do nothing, this is a fig leaf to hide behind.

The other fig leaf is that Congress certifies the election. That fig leaf is even more dubious because if the elections weren't conducted lawfully, and the state legislatures don't get to appoint Congressman or Senators as a last resort, how can an illegitimate Congress be trusted to certify an illegal election? Good luck waiting for an answer to that question from the black robed High Priests of the (former) Republic.

So this all leads to the distinction between the political act of certifying an election, spelled out in the Constitution, and judicial act of remedying fraud. The gentle reader must remember that none of the cases refused hearing at SCOTUS pertained to fraud. They revolved around the issue of, was the election conducted lawfully according to statute? Now those statutes were designed and intended to reduce, if not eliminate fraud, but a determination of widespread fraud is plainly a judicial function, especially for evidence of fraud not available when the election was certified.

So, if the Kraken now has sufficient evidence of actual fraud, not just the possibility of it, to overturn the election, that is a different issue from the cases just removed from SCOTUS's docket. Giuliani was criticized for not litigating that issue without all of the evidence, but I think that he made the more prudent choice. What Sidney Powell is hinting at is a petition for a writ of quo warranto that Joe and the Ho fraudulently were certified for their offices. It's never been done before for national office, but it remains, theoretically, possible. The difficulties include that this must be filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, but if the evidence is there, it shouldn't matter. At least Merrick Garland is ethically barred from hearing the case now that he has been nominated as the pretender AG.

So, some hope remains that the greatest election fraud in the history of the U.S. of A. could be eventually unraveled. We can all pray for divine assistance with combating the evil we have all witnessed. In the meantime, we can exercise our Second Amendment rights to show that we own this country. It is a protest that scares the hell out of the coup plotters. Remember the scene in To Kill A Mockingbird where lawyer Atticus Finch gets called upon to shoot the mad dog that wandered into town? In the Old America, no one needed to call the police to handle that job.

[RinaseaofDs]

Justice Thomas thinks this matter ought to be examined, and he thinks there’s standing and evidence enough for the case to be heard.

Something happened, and I don’t trust our election system. Folks on this thread obviously are cool with it. Feet’s on fire and they think their steaks are done.