Posted on 11/28/2022 7:01:51 PM PST by RobaWho
1) Supreme Court Clerk CHOSE this case & Clerk assisted with filing
2) Lame Duck Congress planning to expand SC to 15 seats, pack court, reduce lifetime tenure of Justices - an open secret in DC
3) SC votes for plaintiff, it thrives as designed
4) SC denies plaintiff, it becomes irrelevant overnight
5) SC won’t be required to claim “Trump won”
6) SC only claims law was clearly ignored, violated
7) SC lives or dies with this decision in hand
8) Bitch & moan all you wish, these are the facts
1) Supreme Court Clerk CHOSE this case & Clerk assisted with filing
2) Lame Duck Congress planning to expand SC to 15 seats, pack court, reduce lifetime tenure of Justices - an open secret in DC
3) SC votes for plaintiff, it thrives as designed
4) SC denies plaintiff, it becomes irrelevant overnight
5) SC won’t be required to claim “Trump won”
6) SC only claims law was clearly ignored, violated
7) SC lives or dies with this decision in hand
8) Bitch & moan all you wish, these are the facts
Seems to me this should apply to the Supreme Court...they let us all down in the 2020 election. They were the last refuge for defense and they turned away from their responsibility for technicalities.
Would be good to have a link to the filed complaint.
In the complaint, it is required that Plaintiff’s state claims upon which relief may be granted.
Claims that officeholders failed to do their duty will need to present how they had knowledge and intent, yet failed to follow their required duty.
It will be easy for any officeholder to respond there was no evidence that rose to the level of halting proceedings, or they didn’t know about it, or the requested delay time was inadequate to complete an investigation or hearings where conclusions could be drawn and matters addressed. This last option may give grounds for House hearings, but as elected members are largely in on it, it will fall back to voters who have been unwittingly stripped of their power to choose.
The SCOTUS hearing will serve only to leave a record of why such challenges were unsuccessful.
I wish it were different.
The truth is that the Cultural Marxist Fascist takedown of the United States via subversion of its elections systems and installation of key officeholders cannot be reversed, let alone stopped, via judicial action, nor legislative action as the latter is vulnerable to subversion of election processes underlying it.
There can be pyrrhic victories in law and legislation, but these will stay confined to small nonimpacting jurisdictions. They will very likely not grow.
History shows the only way to reverse a Cultural Marxist or fascist takeover from within is via a populist uprising where people are willing to die or go to jail to effect change. This has/had a chance recently in AZ but will likely fade out as a whimper when most media move on to different subjects.
I wish it were different.
According to certain Never-Trumper FReepers, the 2020 erection was the most secure in US history, and Trump is a three-time loser.
Move along, folks, there’s nothing to see here.
The Executive and the Congress must abide by the law as it is written. Enforcement of that is the Court’s function.
“Congress was required to pause in order to investigate and ascertain the validity of these concerns. Among other things, this pause would have delayed the January 6th vote by Congress to certify the Electors and thus confirm the results of the election and next President of the United States.”
What is the Constitutional and legal basis of this charge??
The court has no enforcement mechanism.
It takes 2 of the 3 coequal branches to make any aspect of law real.
They refused to take the other cases, letting lower cases stand. I can understand much of this, since the SCOTUS wants to appear apolitical.
I personally had a big problem with the lawsuit from Texas against the other states that refused to follow their own elections laws, thus depriving the voice of people from Texas and other states. (Allowing Election rigging in your state effects other states on a federal election level). The SCOTUS took a political side by refusing to hear this original jurisdiction case.
Here, they are picking a case that deals with events of the 2020 election werein the law is clean and rights were ignored. The call for a pause, and emergency audit/investigation wasn’t a call to overturn any voting, but to directly address potential illegal acts. Yet, they had a constitutional duty to ensure that the election was investigated and was found to be the voice of the people. They refused. This is a clean case of did they follow the law or not.
Since they have taken up the case, they have not ‘vacated’ it. They will hear arguments. The will make a decision. This case is interesting to me because the plantiffs picked a point in time where procedure wasn’t followed, and riots and deaths co-existed. Would there have been a ‘Jan 6th’ if the law had been followed?
Morning, Freepers! Word on the “street” is the Brunson Case was fully ADJUDICATED on Friday, Nov. 25, 2022. Given that we remain in a state
of National Emergency, and we’ve been engaged in a global war against the darkest forces on earth & in the spiritual realm, never forget the Supreme Court (and those who are controlling this Kangaroo Court), have infinite flexibility as to when they announce & enforce their decision. Battlefield conditions are always fluid and timing is always critical. The most essential truth in wartime is to never pre-announce your actions so your enemy can make adjustments. DECEPTION is the single most powerful weapon in wartime - Tsun Zu
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.