Posted on 12/09/2020 8:17:16 PM PST by Golden Eagle
“I felt very strongly when he was running that Ted Cruz was running to save the Republic.”
You’re probably right. In that context it kind of makes sense he’d be hard on candidate Trump. At that time, DJT was pretty much an unknown quantity when it came to strict politics, so Cruz wasn’t sure how he’d be when it came to the Constitution.
Now he knows. Now he can defend PDJT to the ends of the earth.
Re: Trump Asks Sen. Cruz to Argue Texas Supreme Court Election Case
If true, that is a critical mistake.
Cruz has not prepared or argued a case since 2012.
He will get crushed in oral arguments, which is the only “case” the general public will hear about.
Re: Cruz was A.G. of Texas
Cruz was Solicitor General.
Cruz was appointed by the Texas Attorney General in 2003.
Cruz intended to run for AG in 2010, but his old boss decided to seek a third term, so Cruz withdrew.
Thinking maybe Trump and Cruz have come to an agreement that if Cruz backs Trump now, Trump backs Cruz in 2024 election.
This is a real test for Supreme Court, if they do not follow the constitution which is clear in this matter, we know the Court has been compromised by the Chinacrats.
As usual, they made a misleading statement. The article says that the suit is over last minute changes made by state legislatures. This is incorrect; last minute changes were made by state governors and/or courts, not legislatures.
The distinction is critical, in fact the entirety of the case is based on the fact that the changes were invalid precisely because it was NOT the legislatures making them. The Constitution gives state legislatures, not governors or courts, the sole power to determine the manner in which Presidential electors are chosen.
Had the legislatures made the changes, we could oppose them and think it’s wrong, but there would be no constitutional issue for the SCOTUS to rule upon. The other races affected by these changes; races for senate, house seats, local elections, etc., also are unaffected by this — there’s no constitutional issue involved with any of them.
1) decide whether we are still America, as founded, governed by the rule of law, in which case some serious blood will be spilled on the streets and, ultimately, troops will be needed to put down the attempted overthrow of our nation, or
2) decide whether we will cease to be America, as founded, nothing more than a prize to be claimed by whoever can swindle elections, foment fear in the population, threaten, badger, and beat down one's opponents through intimidation and disinformation, in which case some serious blood will be spilled on the streets as patriotic Americans rise up to take back their country.
Same for Jay.
I agree with you, except IF......
Obama and those who pushed him forward are all exposed, prosecuted, sentenced and punished......and his name expunged from thr records as much as possible.
Ah, Your attorney is supposed to be partisan. You don’t suppose the opposition has a non-partisan lawyer arguing do you?
..class move by the President if true.
Cruz has his own interests, but this is an opportunity of a lifetime.
The Republic needs heroes right now...
She may prove to be in the same league as Alito and Thomas.
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.