Replies

You make my point. I was astounded that the Texas lawsuit with some 16? States submitting amicus briefs was thrown out due to no standing. Texas and the other states had no standing when their citizen's votes were voided due to clear evidential fraud? Because the Supremes wouldn't be bothered with the merits of the case, this Nation is now on fire.

The concept of "standing" is best understood of a device that courts use when they don't want to hear a case, and the injury is somehow obscured or indirect. There is no clear test for it. Common law courts can and do make exceptions to their rules in an unintelligible manner. Our constitution is a very old document which needs to be updated so that its meaning isn't overly dependent on judges.

What the court is hiding behind is that the Twelfth Amendment reads that the state legislatures are to appoint presidential electors. That doesn't happen in modern practice. The practice has become that states have elections for the presidential electors. So even when the legislature provides by statute for an election, the courts have been saying that only the legislature has standing if the rules aren't followed. This is, of course, contrary to what the Rhenquist court did in Bush v. Gore. So now that is a worthless precedent, why? Was SCOTUS being political then, now, or in both instances? If there are tapes of Roberts saying he would make sure Trump didn't win the election as rumored, I would love to hear them.

To paraphrase one Freeper's tagline: I spent 11 years of my life defending the rights of others, only to see them take mine away. It will happen with the commies in charge. There is no doubt in a rational mind.

People here ask if the military will support Trump when the Insurrection Act is announced to reverse the corrupt election. Some in the top brass may not, but when the rank and file understands that their votes were stolen for a senile, illegitimate pretender POTUS, I think they will. I suspect that the delay in the announcement is securing communications so Trump can communicate to people directly and avoid the filters of the corporate media and Big Tech.

Lots of good info, but if the USSC willy-nilly uses "no standing", then what good is it?

I get the 12th Amendment and the Individual States having their own electoral laws/rules. I've been a States' advocate for years. However, in Bush vs Gore, the ruling was the Governors/SOS could not defy their own State Constitutions. It was a good ruling and was part of the Texas lawsuit.

"People here ask if the military will support Trump when the Insurrection Act is announced to reverse the corrupt election. Some in the top brass may not, but when the rank and file understands that their votes were stolen for a senile, illegitimate pretender POTUS, I think they will."

More importantly, do the National Guard week-end warriors want kill their parents, siblings, and friends? Forget the the top brass. What will the upper enlisted order? BTW, this is moot because there will be no face down in a field or on the streets. If come to be, it will be a clandestine guerilla war. Guess who will be targeted first.

Remember to smell the flowers, Doctor. Peace be with you and our Nation.