Posted on 11/25/2020 9:18:03 PM PST by Fractal Trader
I’m actually a gainfully-employed (female) petroleum engineer and Christian patriot with another set of degrees from the University of Chicago. I also live in and own a $550k home with zero support from mommy and daddy and have zero (non-mortgage) debt. So...nice yet entirely wrong generalizations.
For whatever reason, I’m sure it’s comforting to think ALL us young’ins are lazy, basement-dwelling, blabbering, America-hating, entitled morons who care nothing about preserving the country our elders have worked so hard to create. If that myopia about a chunk of your fellow countrymen helps you sleep at night, whatever. (I’d recommend trying a weighted blanket; they’re magic.)
Jumping down someone’s throat because they are younger than you and dare to constructively criticize something our side has submitted to the US court system is completely unnecessary. I am not the only one on here pointing out flaws in the grammar, spelling, and organization of the lawsuit. Are you being an ass to everyone else too or is that honor reserved for special snowflakes like me?
Maybe you don’t, but I have a higher standard than this for an accomplished lawyer like Sidney Powell. She/we have the evidence, a preponderance x 100 in fact. It’s merely a shame to think that the garbled way it’s presented could undermine what the evidence clearly shows. Substance is great, but impressions matter greatly too, particularly in this uphill fight. It’s really not just the thought that counts.
You cannot be serious about thinking a 9-0 SCOTUS victory is in the cards here?? Politics + death threats + blackmail NOT evidence are all that matter or were you napping for the past four years of the attempted crucifixion of Trump with Z-E-R-O evidence? (He was impeached!! For nothing!!) Even this nOOb knows that. I genuinely wish this were a country where a 9-0 ruling on anything at SCOTUS was a possibility. 5-4 just came down yesterday on Cuomo’s blatantly, horrifyingly unconstitutional limit on gathering size at religious services for heaven’s sake! There could not be a more obvious case for a 9-0 thumping than that, yet here we are, with Roberts in the dissent. Even excluding traitorous Roberts, you actually think Kagan and the Wise Latina will EVER side with the Constitution and Trump here? Knowing what we know about them and their activist judicial philosophies, on what basis can you seriously think that?
Fun for you.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Figured it was obvious — mocking the impatient ones.
Happy Thanksgiving!
I hope you enjoyed a very pleasant Thanksgiving.
Thanks, that’s very kind of you, and I wish you the same.
Thanks, that’s very kind of you, and I wish you the same.
If you'd bothered to actually read, rather than selectively imbibe from blackpill doomage sites, you'd find out that there are two causes for the typos:
1) the OCR system which reads the actual court documents into the PACER system
2) a few deliberate typos to gull the MSM into breaking their information embargo and mention the lawsuits. (CodeMonkeyZ pointed this out. He ran the site for the Q drops and also helped Powell's team when he came across an actual set of the Dominion *manuals*.)
3) Real practicing lawyers on other forums point out that judges usually give considerable leeway for amended filings to handle typos and so forth; for example one of these lawsuits is completely missing footnote 14 (which is apparently a reference to an article in a print/web MSM publication, not expert opinion).
But there's more than this.
You seem to be of the impression, that this filing is and was done primarily for the sake of the PR / "shoring up morale of the troops" and that the typos will ruin the credibility.
But what's actually going on, is that these lawsuits are the work product of people FAR more skilled at law, with infinitely more specialized experience, and yes, even intellect, than you.
The entire point of these suits, is not to impress lay people, or to win in the lower courts. The purpose of the suits is to meet very specific legal thresholds, for the purposes of COMPELLING specific actions by the court, based on existing Federal and Supreme Court precedent based on existing case law.
That's why they're not concerned with "proof" : since this is a legal case, the threshold is "preponderance of the evidence". Further, as plaintiffs, they do not need to show that ballots WERE tainted. They need to show (by the aforementioned preponderance of the evidence) that a threshold level of ballots MAY have been tainted, and that the number so tainted would be enough, *if* proven, to reverse the apparent results of the election for President. They are doing this because (while everyone runs around like chickens with their heads cut off worrying) the Courts are concerned with preserving the Constitution, and with preserving the legitimate role and reputation of the courts.
THREE members of the Supreme Court were involved with Bush v. Gore, either as Justices, or as lawyers on the winning side (Bush) on very specific Constitutional grounds.
So the presentation of the case is not designed for a "Law and Order: SVU" TV-type sweeping revelation, but a slow "three yards and a cloud of dust" inevitability in the Supreme Court's final ruling. (It doesn't help, btw, that Justice Thomas was falsely accused of sexual assault during his confirmation hearings by one Senator (D - DE) Joseph Biden, and that Justice Kavanaugh was falsely accused of running rape trains by one Sen. (Whore - CA) Heels-up Harris.)
Does the Supreme Court have to "overturn the election?"
Certainly there exists precedent for Judges to overturn elections. Look at this link from The Heritage Foundation. But I don't think they will necessarily go that far, it would be a drastic measure. I agree, the Supreme Court would be loath to do that; much better to either void the late, uncertain votes, and stay with the safe ones (Trump wins!) Or, they could cancel the results of the elections in some of the questionable states; this would have the result that the target for a majority of the electoral votes would not be 270 (a majority of the electors from all 50 states), but some lesser number (a majority of the states reporting sending slates of electors to the Electoral College). But I don't think the Supreme Court would do that; read up on the 1876 election for more on that.
The most likely course regarding the Supreme Court's actions in this election would be to follow the Constitution, and duck the issue, and send the choice back either to the legislatures of the states in question (most are GOP-controlled), or to the Congress as a whole (which the GOP holds a majority in, because in this case, the voting in the House is not "best of 435 Representatives" but "majority of 50 states"; and the Senate would vote in Pence as VP).
The planned end-game of the libs is either to foment a color revolution -- which doesn't work when the existing government stops short of escalating to violence against civilians -- or else to go into a four-corners stall so that NOBODY is chosen by the deadline, in which case Nazi Pelousy takes over temporarily.
The counter to that, is that President Trump can invoke the Insurrection Act, if he finds that both the Executive (Governors, Federal Agencies like the FBI) and the Courts, ignore open, obvious lawbreaking.
The OTHER element in the case, is the introduction of certain factual evidence, so that it can remain an element of the case later on, about foreign involvement in the election. That would be the stuff about Dominion and the access of Iran and China to the Dominion servers. This is most likely due to this Executive Order from 2018, about Sanctions in the case of foreign interference in the United States elections.
It's interesting reading, particularly when it comes to penalties.
But the other thing -- which nobody seems to comment on -- is the public behavior of the principals involved. Trump went *golfing* right after the election, not a sign of a tinhorn dictator worried about getting thrown out. And the top Democrats have remained suspiciously quiet, not with their usual sneering and gloating when they feel they have something in the bag and they are untouchable.
In fact, some commenters have suggested that the voter fraud was SO over-the-top obvious, that the Dems did it deliberately, hoping to be caught. Suggesting that they have something else up their sleeve.
This is most likely
a) the aforementioned Nazi Pelousy gambit
b) a "Color Revolution" which the CIA has performed elsewhere; Q posted about this very scenario six weeks before he election
c) open connivance with China and/or Iran. The hints of major bribes by China (e.g. Secretary of State Pompeo addressing a group of US Governors about China having ranked them according to their reliability from the Chinese point of view); and hints of *literal* massing of Chinese troops in Canada just north of Seattle, and tracking of large trains of US armored vehicles up into Maine a few weeks ago (seen on YouTube) give these an air of verisimilitude, though they are not at all proof.
Well, I have seen so much negativity and hand-wringing lately that I was not sure—Lots of people here and in media need to have a serving of crow with their turkey.
I completely understand.
The complaints began late afternoon — was shaking my head in disbelief of the expectations and impatience.
Sidney’s running circles around the DOJ, and yet she’s criticized for perhaps requiring another day or two.
Hence my sarcasm about filing 18 minutes after midnight.
I probably already blipped you to this, so please ignore. But I wanted to post it here, because the info at the links, sure does answer a lot of questions for several FR members.
Sidney Powell filings - complaints and exhibits:
Michigan
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18693929/king-v-whitmer/
Georgia
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18694655/pearson-v-kemp/
Lin Wood filings - Georgia
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18632787/wood-v-raffensperger/
Lin Wood filed in Georgia (11/25/2020), a corrected Russ Ramsland affidavit:
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.283580/gov.uscourts.gand.283580.70.1.pdf
that shows a variety of info (including for Michigan and Minnesota), but especially REPLACES the Ramsland affidavit of 11/18/2020.
Thank you for the update, the Ramsland affidavit is an important piece of evidence.
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.