Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Big Tech is suppressing information about writ of quo warranto, the ‘Trump play’
https://noqreport.com ^ | by JD Rucker | January 27, 2021

Posted on 01/27/2021 12:59:15 PM PST by Red Badger

There are two major reasons President Trump should file a writ of quo warranto. One big reason it to attempt to remove Joe Biden and Kamala Harris from office. Perhaps that's why Google, Facebook, Twitter, Spotify, and others are attempting to suppress information about it.

President Trump has a play he and his team can make to challenge the results of the 2020 election. It’s a longshot, but it doesn’t fall into the realm of shadow-government-military-coup or some of the other theories we’ve heard lately. This one is legitimate, legal, and does not require suspension of disbelief. It’s called a “writ of quo warranto,” something we’ve covered a couple of times on NOQ Report recently.

Unfortunately, unless you’re a regular reader of Leo Donofrio, 100percentfedup, or a handful of other websites, you’ve probably never heard of it. We’ve found a strong suppression of the facts and opinions surrounding this, a suppression that has hit close to home here. Google, after showing our original article on the first page for searches for the term, has removed the article altogether. Links of Facebook and Twitter were quickly censored. Now, Spotify and a pair of podcast hosts have dropped us inexplicably, coincidentally following the publication of our first podcast on the issue.

Are they worried? Probably not. Like I said, it’s a longshot. With a writ of quo warranto, Trump or other aggrieved parties can file with the Department of Justice in order to present evidence that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris do not have the authority to be in office. The predicate for this would be voter fraud corrupting the election, starting the dominos falling for what eventually led to the January 20 inauguration. Precedent shows that if accepted, it can be heard in the DC Circuit Court and potentially work its way up to the Supreme Court.

As Donofrio noted in a recent article, there’s another reason the Trump team should file before the coming impeachment trial in the Senate. If his writ is pending with the DoJ or in court, theoretically he cannot participate in an impeachment trial until the writ is resolved.

On the latest episode of NOQ Report, I dove deeper into the censorship surrounding a writ of quo warranto as well as the possibilities surrounding the action itself. Nobody outside of President Trump’s circle is aware of the plan going forward, but this would be a smart move from multiple angles.

What do they have to hide? Considering a writ of quo warranto is a longshot for President Trump, one would think it wouldn’t even be on Big Tech’s radar. It is, and that alone should get patriots digging deeper.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: Dr. Franklin

Thanks Dr. Franklin.


21 posted on 01/27/2021 2:42:04 PM PST by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

Has Rudy weighed in on this?


22 posted on 01/27/2021 2:43:53 PM PST by PhiloBedo (You gotta roll with the punches, and get with what's real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Courts will not remove Biden even if a court declares his victory illegal.

His removal will need to be political.

Impeachment is the only real path even if legally he is declared illegitimate


23 posted on 01/27/2021 2:45:14 PM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

Quo Warranto would nullify all of Biden’s powers, he wouldn’t be able to get any order carried out and it would extend to Harris.

Pelosi would be next in line temporarily. I believe she would be CINC until the 12th Amendment process was executed.


24 posted on 01/27/2021 3:20:59 PM PST by Hostage (Article V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
There is a bit more legal opinion here in which the author opines that quo warranto won't work, but Trump should file for a declaratory judgment:

Former President Donald J. Trump Should File a Declaratory Judgment Action and Not a Quo Warranto Action

Since challenging the validity of certified presidential election by the Congress has never before been attempted, it is difficult to predict with certainty what the courts will do. They have refused to do much of anything so far. Yet, there are still cases pending at SCOTUS.
25 posted on 01/27/2021 3:27:25 PM PST by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

You need to realize that anyone posting a possible strategy or solution to a problem will be met with hoots and hollers from FR’s fat-ass hand-wringers and FR’s numerous 50 IQ, brainwashed Soros trolls.

FR has lost its claim as a conservative site offering reasoned discussion and become a shrieking, mad Soros blog.


26 posted on 01/27/2021 3:32:40 PM PST by sergeantdave (Federal courts no longer have any standing in America. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red6

Do I think these elections were fair and square?

LOL

Sure, the same way Maduro won...


27 posted on 01/27/2021 3:49:43 PM PST by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZG2M)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
This article fails to explain what quo warranto is.

You can look for it yourself. Take some initiative.

If you don't have any initiative...allow me...

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=quo+warranto&va=b&t=hc&ia=web

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=ev8RYIKHMsfetQWgsbG4AQ&q=quo+warranto&oq=quo+warranto&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzIICAAQsQMQgwEyAggAMggIABCxAxCDATICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADICCABQihhYihhggDZoAHAAeACAAWmIAWmSAQMwLjGYAQCgAQKgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwiCrL-Eqr3uAhVHb60KHaBYDBcQ4dUDCAg&uact=5

https://www.bing.com/search?q=quo+warranto&form=QBLH&sp=-1&pq=quo+warranto&sc=8-12&qs=n&sk=&cvid=ABD893189AFC4F32820782D11E3AA07C

28 posted on 01/27/2021 4:06:11 PM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

At this point I would think Speaker of the House and Pres Pro Tempore would have greater claim to the office than Trump.


29 posted on 01/27/2021 5:14:07 PM PST by scrabblehack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
Agree. 👍

There a some on FR who, like the democRATS, demand you think like they do or you're delusional, crazy, stupid, ignorant, etc. etc. etc.

Estuve alla. Ya lo hice.

30 posted on 01/27/2021 5:45:01 PM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

It should be tried.

It goes on record.


31 posted on 01/27/2021 6:45:52 PM PST by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
It should be tried. It goes on record.

Having filed so many law suits, what's one or two more? The problem is that the evidence is still being hidden.
32 posted on 01/27/2021 6:58:32 PM PST by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
The text of the statute:

Subchapter I. Actions Against Officers of the United States.
§ 16–3501. Persons against whom issued; civil action. A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action.

Some genius has posted that this doesn't work because POTUS isn't a "public office". I don't think that argument works, but the courts have gotten goofy about this election.
33 posted on 01/27/2021 7:08:42 PM PST by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Franklin

It should be tried. It goes on record.

Having filed so many law suits, what’s one or two more? The problem is that the evidence is still being hidden.

It shows good faith.

They are being given a chance to act lawfully.


34 posted on 01/27/2021 7:19:07 PM PST by ifinnegan (Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
It shows good faith. They are being given a chance to act lawfully.

The beauty of it is, if successful, the entire Biden presidency is void ab initio. Every E.O., every person appointed, etc. is null and void.
35 posted on 01/27/2021 7:35:13 PM PST by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

That’s not how this is going to play out. Have a little faith.


36 posted on 01/27/2021 9:40:05 PM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson