[mbrfl]

One of the people in the roundtable discussion you linked to is banned from this thread - which is a shame, because he’s given the most reasonable explanation I’ve seen for why the plan has gone in the direction it has rather than directly confronting the election theft prior to Jan. 20th.

His explanation, which is seeming more and more likely every day, is that Trump and patriots in the military were concerned about how they would be viewed in the present and in the history books if the military seized control of the government prematurely. He claims the military are waiting for a court victory before they weigh in publicly on the subject. According to him, they don’t necessarily need a case that makes it all the way to the Supreme Court, but just some legal acknowledgment of the theft at some level (e.g. Arizona). Makes sense to me.

The Supreme Court doesn’t have a monopoly on all decisions. If the military has some legal justification for looking into the election and they subsequently determine the election was subverted by a foreign enemy, they are the institution that has the primary responsibility and authority to address it - not the Supreme Court.

[Snowybear]

> The Supreme Court doesn’t have a monopoly on all decisions. If the military has some legal justification for looking into the election and they subsequently determine the election was subverted by a foreign enemy, they are the institution that has the primary responsibility and authority to address it - not the Supreme Court.

Quite right, sir.

-SB

[cherry]

I find it very very scary that despite careful planning and consideration by our founding fathers, who set up the three branches of govt, that outright treason can only apparently be addressed by the military....

and what if the military is corrupt?....some of these generals are totalitarian leftists...

the legislative branch and the judicial branch has AMPLE pathways to prevent this election farce and they FAILED to do their duty....