Posted on 12/10/2020 4:27:26 AM PST by RoosterRedux
Texas claims that the presidential elections as held (and as directed by government officials outside the legislature) in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan all flagrantly violated their own election laws by materially weakening or doing away with security measures. Further, according to the U.S. Constitution, the legislature (representing the citizens) of each state has absolute authority and responsibility for how presidential electors are chosen; the will of legislature being expressed through state law.
Texas claims that the violations of election law in these states created an environment where ballot fraud was enabled and likely to occur. The lawsuit lists the violations of law in each of the defendant states and provides evidence of fraud (the number of ballots handled unconstitutionally) in each of the states sufficient to change the outcome of the ballot counts.
*snip - state by state details*
Significant violations of election law that were put into place to protect against election fraud is sufficient to invalidate the results of the elections, apart from whatever evidence is able to be gathered in a short time to show actual numbers of fraudulent ballots. Reason would indicate that there is a high number of fraudulent ballots that are impossible to identify, which is why the election laws pertaining to mail-in ballots were established to begin with.
There is no remedy to correct the Nov 3rd election because ballots that did not adhere to election law cannot be identified as separate from those that did. An accurate count of legal ballots that were cast cannot be made. Therefore, as directed in the Constitution, it falls to the legislature of each state to choose electors as has been done in the past. Failing that, each state may determine not to submit any presidential electors.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
If anyone believes the SCOTUS will institute a remedy that has Trump the POTUS after noon on Jan 20, they’re dreaming.
The Texas lawsuit before the USSC argues that PA, GA, MI, and WI violated the Constitution by:
(A) changing election laws, thereby treating voters unequally, and, (B) allowed serious voting irregularities.
A BRILLIANT LEGAL ATTACK: Trump is asking that “every legal vote count,” that the court invalidate illegal votes.
Lower court judges would not hear voter fraud cases, deciding that, if they were to consider
Trump’s claims, they ran the risk of “disenfranchising” Biden voters........a singularly dishonest argument.
Disenfranchisement occurs when people are deprived of the right to vote.
No one was “deprived” of the vote here. So-called Biden “voters” all voted.
No one can disenfranchise a “voter” who was illegal from the get-go, particularly when that “Biden voter” is
<><> dead,
<><> an amorphous computer algorithm,
<><> or a paper form mfg in a Chinese print shop submitted as a voter.
And the state laws that were changed or weakened was not done by the state legislature which is required by the constitution. There for those laws changed should not apply to the election of 2020. And those ballots allowed by mail in or allowed after Nov should be thrown out of count and audited signature verified recount should be done or no electoral should be given.
Chinese interference in an election.
This may be a Pyrrhic victory at best. Trump may well win but SCOTUS will never give him the relief he is seeking. I suspect that’s why they just refused to hear the PA case which was almost certainly a slam dunk win.
Ping
So, you insist that there is zero chance that Justices such as Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh are going to look at this strictly Constitutional violation and be too cowardly, unprincipled, or to desirous of being invited to the right parties in Washington to vote on it and find in favor of the states that are suing?
We just had an American Patriot pass away and Fly West the other day, Chuck Yeager. And he has a specific incident that we should keep in mind.
Chuck Yeager was a test pilot, who found himself in an experimental aircraft in a flat spin, falling from 80,000 feet towards the desert floor, his altimeter ticking away as he was violently smashed against the inside of the cockpit. He had been a test pilot for years at that point, surviving in a trade where a full one quarter of all pilots who strapped themselves into experimental aircraft were being killed.
As he fell after exhausting all of his knowledge and it seemed hopeless, he thought “If I can get this plane into an inverted spin, I can get out of this, because I know how to do that in this plane...” so that is what he tried.
Most aviators upon hearing this thought process were surely horrified. To most aviators, that was the equivalent of saying you needed to light your gasoline soaked clothes on fire because you knew how to put out a fire.
Chuck Yeager, could not save the plane, but he saved himself and ended up living to the age of 97, last going up in a jet fighter at the age of 89.
The point is, as a flight instructor related to Bill Whittle (a prominent conservative aviator) back when he was learning to fly was: Never give up. Never give up hope, ever. In a situation like that, if you have to, fight the plane all they way down until it hits the ground, because there is always, always a way out.
That is what the President is doing, and it is what we need to do. If we must, we owe it to our country to fight this all the way down to the ground, even into the crater of a Biden Presidency if we have to.
If anyone believes the SCOTUS will institute a remedy that has Trump the POTUS after noon on Jan 20, they’re dreaming.
If anyone believes the SCOTUS will institute a remedy that has Trump the POTUS after noon on Jan 20, they’re dreaming.
>><<
How can any SC Justice who failed to defend the Constitution per
their oath keep their seat on the Court?
It’s time for a convention of states.
Absolutely zero.
If you want to surrender, nobody can stop you.
Your state has guts. Thank God for Texas. If you go along for the ride only, that is your prerogative.
At this point the best path forward is for a candidate to take voter integrity up as a 24 issue. Yes it sucks. The GOP nominally controls a majority of state legislatures. Get them to set rules which will eliminate the crap we saw this year. But agree. SCOTUS will NOT overturn the results as they stand.
Let us know when you do something more that type on the keyboard.
I think they will decide for Texas but as far as relief will punt it back to the state legislatures to decide if they send their electors to Congress or not.
It’s a safe bet to say the SCOTUS will not determine the next POTUS but they certainly can determine the legal and constitutional process that will make that decision.
I believe there is a path for Trump to serve a second term.
There is no doubt the country is deeply divided and Joe Biden is not the person to shrink that divide. He will most likely divide the country further just like Obama did.
This Texas case makes the same argument that SCOTUS used to rule on Bush V Gore. Changing election rule violates the equal protection of other voters.
The cases differ in that Fore argues to change the rules “after” the vote. MI, WI, PA and GA illegally changed the rules “before” the vote.
I suppose one could weasel word their way to viewing these two things differently.
That's my thought too. They can say they held up the constitution but did not decide the election. By punting to the State legislatures to either ratify or reject the actions of the election officials and the certified results they can claim that elected persons decided the outcome and not them.
Memo to defeatists: drop dead”
We should not come here to fight for them with a defeatist mindset.
Ayee, true, I know the democrats are many.
However, Donald J.Trump IS William Wallace!
Did you not know he shoots FIREBALLS from his ass at the fake news?
Right now, he sees over 73 million people, a whole army of his countrymen HERE in defiance of tyranny,
We are not here to listen to those who say “there is nothing we can do about it”.
We are here to fight as free men, and free men we are!
Will you fight?
AGAINST THAT? Dominion, ANTIFA! BLM! Nancy! Kamala! The Squad and Maxine!
NO WAY!
Aye, OK, run from them and you will live.
At least a while.
You know your name is on their list don’t you?
However, when dying in your beds many years from now.
Would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for one chance,
Just one chance to come back here and tell the democrats that they may take our lives but they will NEVER take our FREEDOM!
Braveheart (1995) - Best scene - William Wallace’s speech (HD)
Yeah. Uh-huh. Sure.
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.