Posted on 12/09/2020 1:23:20 PM PST by tarpit
Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, respectfully seeks leave to intervene in the pending original jurisdiction matter of State of Texas v. Com-monwealth of Pennsylvania,et al., No. 22O155 (filed Dec. 7, 2020). Plaintiff in Intervention seeks leave to file the ac-companying Bill of Complaint in Intervention against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the States of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin (“Defendant States”), challenging their administration of the 2020 presidential election.
(Excerpt) Read more at supremecourt.gov ...
Thanks for the clarification. You might wish to call the posts negative. Based on what I am reading, I prefer the term reality.
“The Supreme Court will not take up this case because something should have done months earlier.”
That is a valid concern.
Except for one thing. The Illegal votes were not committed yet.. It took the election for the illegal votes to be unconstitutional!!
This will be a tough case for the Supreme Court. They have to decide between two bad precedents, neither of which they want to occur: allowing democrats to run a coup d’etat against a president through vote fraud and breaking election laws, or getting the court seriously involved in presidential elections by throwing out the fraudulent vote counts in four states and directing the state legislatures to choose a group of presidential electors for each state. They really don’t want either precedent to be set, but they’re going to have to choose one.
As unlikely as it appears now, the court may decide that the precedent of a blatantly stolen presidential election is worse than the court effectively deciding the election. That means there’s a significant chance that they will throw out the election results from the four defendant states and send it to the state legislatures to choose a group of presidential electors, and all four legislatures are controlled by Republicans. This means Trump would win the election if the fraudulent vote counts are thrown out. This could happen, because a presidential election stolen through fraud and lawbreaking sets such a terrible precedent, and could lead to a series of stolen elections and a descent of the USA into a corrupt one-party system. A blatantly stolen presidential election in 2020 could be the end of a functional constitutional republic in the USA. So this is an extremely important court case, perhaps the most important SCOTUS case in history, and I think the courts knows this. So this case could go either way, and I sure hope Texas and the other states win this case.
Yes we do!
The minute you claim targeted victimhood you invoke habeas corpus, and have to prove the injury. No proof of injury + no conclusive proof of illegality = uphill battle to get the case heard.
As I believe Eastman was saying, the suit does show lots of evidence of probable fraud (and thus "victimhood"). But since the defendants increased the risk of fraud when they illegally changed the rules, it's up to the defendants to prove that there was no fraud, which of course is impossible to prove, especially given the massive amount of substantive evidence.
So I think there does need to be a possible injured party, else the SC would think that there is no need to issue a remedy, or even take the case. But there doesn't have to be conclusive proof of that fraud.
When will we hear their decision? Any guesses?
It’s It’s Donald Trump / Lyn Wood in Supreme Court and Texas is out I thought. Kinda like all the soldiers who were afraid to face the giant but David faced the giant alone and cut off his head. God is with us.
Linda this was focused on Texas v PA et al. I am thankful to everyone for helping me present both sides of the arguments. I am especially thankful to the professors for their input. They called it correct.
The fourth box of Liberty.
Thanks in advance.
Merry Christmas
Amen...
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.