-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- - 32 -

I know this is related. My wife's university NOW no longer provides genetic classes, world history, and plant science.

At the start of covid world history went missing and the President stepped down.

originally posted by: PilSungMtnMan
State/Local Swamps are just as deep and murky as the one in DC.

I suspect this is plays a huge role - if they agreed on their own to count only legal votes here in MI, I’m confident that Whitmer would not be getting a switch from a conservative Supreme Court to a liberal Supreme Court next month. I’m also positive John James, and not Gary Peters, would be my Senator and I would have ex-CIA Slotkin as my House Rep.

While they don’t want to give up the ghost on any of the election results, this way only impacts and potentially overturns one race, which means Whitmer will be able to carry on with her utter destruction of the great state of MI as planned.

I haven’t looked up the local races of the other states but they probably have similar scenarios.

A big THANX to Dashen and All who spend a lot of time and effort to contribute here- bring light to darkness. This is done in a pretty much in a respectful way. I have been around different discussion forums over the years since my first Pentium 2 200Mhz on dial up. There was a good feel to this place and people, though you never really know in the virtual world. Unlike the Army where you "Be All You Can BE" - the web you can "Be Who You Want To Be." I have been on the mod side too. Places have backrooms for moderator as well as admin discussion and planning. It's not uncommon for a mod to play another member to "liven things up" in the forums. I never really went for the "mysterious visitors" but as long as the info is good and no harm.

Thanx again Folks

originally posted by: Flesh699

originally posted by: Creep Thumper
Does anyone know where Lance is? I thought he'd be weighing in on these cases? I hope he's okay.

He freaked out because there was too much talking about lizards. Lawyers are a weird bunch. Here I am having to go through page after page of poltical stuff when really all I want to do is talk about lizards.

Maybe he's gotten himself wrapped up in some Walter White shenanigans because I think he was put out of work by the lockdowns. I imagine him being a meatier Sal Goodman at this point, and has probably hit a few people over the skull in the dark with a thick metal shard. He's probably running around the desert wearing only boxers as we speak, collecting himself before burying the body.

I don’t think it was the lizards, it was the pages and pages of bickering a couple weeks back. To be fair, it was a lot.

a reply to: dashen

PM sent (I think...first time sending a PM!!)

Thanks dashen!

Not sure how to PM you but I want to play
Mostly a lurker for a decade but Q made me post

Will miss all of you
Love is all we need
Love you ALL

MP


a reply to: dashen

Gonna be such a shame to see all this go, been a big part of my daily routine for many years now, this thread being a big part of that.

Great work by everyone, it's the contributors who make this place what it is/was. I have too many personal thanks to mention so wont start rolling off names. Hopefully, the site and all it stands for will be saved, it's the best collection of like minded people your ever likely to find. The fight will go on...... it's in our blood.


Consilio et anamis

Through wisdom and courage my friends.


P.s... if another meeting place is arranged I'd be happy to be a part of it, feel free to PM if I'm welcome.

originally posted by: carewemust
The U.S. Supreme Court has ACCEPTED the Texas vs GA-PA-WI-MI case?!? That's huge!

Where? The docket link doesn't show anything like that...?

bigger

Be sure to use this where appropriate. : )

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

Indeed. Somehow I'm not banned from Twatter so I can be reached there

@DashenAnon

Dashen

PM Sent and thank you from the bottom of my heart for keeping the Q discussion going.

Rel, you have probably already seen it but here is a typo from this morning. Also added another tweet that stand out to me but not sure why.

typo tweet



link



another error: the should be to and comma looks out of place
link

originally posted by: Frodolives
Another question all.

If I read it right, our newest Justice ACB recused herself from the SCOTUS ruling on the PA lawsuit because she was sworn in too close to the election.

Correct - sorry, I misread that. No, it had to do with her not having enough time to properly review the case.

It was then kicked back to the lower court's original decision.

No. The case is still pending.

Read Alito's statement, with which Justice's Thomas and Gorsuch joined. It is very enlightening. Here is an excerpt:

"Statement of JUSTICE ALITO, with whom JUSTICE THOMAS and JUSTICE GORSUCH join.
The Court’s handling of the important constitutional issue raised by this matter has needlessly created conditions that could lead to serious post-election problems. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has issued a decree that squarely alters an important statutory provision enacted by the Pennsylvania Legislature pursuant to its authority under the Constitution of the United States to make rules governing the conduct of elections for federal office. See Art. I, §4, cl. 1; Art. II, §1, cl. 2; Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd., 531 U. S. 70, 76 (2000) (per curiam). In a law called Act 77, the legislature permitted all voters to cast their ballots by mail but unambiguously required that all mailed ballots be received by 8 p.m. on election day. 2019 Pa. Leg. Serv. Act 2019–77; see 25 Pa. Stat. Ann., Tit. 25, §§3146.6(c), 3150.16(c) (Purdon 2020). It also specified that if this provision was declared invalid, much of the rest of Act 77, including its liberalization of mail-in voting, would be void. Act 77, §11. The legislature subsequently made it clear that, in its judgment, the COVID–19 pandemic did not call for any change in the election-day deadline. In a law enacted in March 2020, the legislature addressed election-related issues caused by the pandemic, but it chose not to amend the deadline for the receipt of mailed ballots. See Pa. Leg. Serv. Act 2020–12.
In the face of Act 77’s deadline, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, by a vote of four to three, decreed that mailed ballots need not be received by election day. App. to Pet. for Cert. 80a–81a. Instead, it imposed a different rule: Ballots are to be treated as timely if they are postmarked on or before election day and are received within three days there-after. Id., at 48a. In addition, the court ordered that a ballot with no postmark or an illegible postmark must be regarded as timely if it is received by that same date. Id., at 48a, n. 26. The court expressly acknowledged that the statutory provision mandating receipt by election day was unambiguous and that its abrogation of that rule was not based on an interpretation of the statute. Id., at 43a. It further conceded that the statutory deadline was constitutional on its face, but it claimed broad power to do what it thought was needed to respond to a “natural disaster,” and it justified its decree as necessary to protect voters’ rights under the Free and Equal Elections Clause of the State Constitution. Id., at 44a, 45a–47a.
A month ago, the Republican Party of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Senate leaders asked this Court to stay the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision pending the filing and disposition of a petition for certiorari. See Republican Party of Pennsylvania v. Boockvar, No. 20A54; Scarnati v. Boockvar, No. 20A53. They argued that the state court decision violated the previously cited constitutional provisions, as well as the federal statute setting a uniform date for federal elections. Application for Stay in No. 20A54, p. 2; Application for Stay in No. 20A53, pp. 2–3. Respondent, Democratic Party of Pennsylvania (DPP), agreed that the constitutionality of the State Supreme Court’s decision was a matter of national importance and urged us to grant review and to decide the issue before the election. DPP Response to Application for Stay in No. 20A53 etc., p. 9. Instead of doing what either party sought, the Court simply denied the stay. Although there were four votes to enter a stay, the application failed by an equally divided vote. Now, in a last ditch attempt to prevent the election in Pennsylva-nia from being conducted under a cloud, we have been asked to grant a petition for a writ of certiorari, to expedite review, and to decide the constitutional question prior to the election.
It would be highly desirable to issue a ruling on the constitutionality of the State Supreme Court’s decision before the election. That question has national importance, and there is a strong likelihood that the State Supreme Court decision violates the Federal Constitution. The provisions of the Federal Constitution conferring on state legislatures, not state courts, the authority to make rules governing federal elections would be meaningless if a state court could override the rules adopted by the legislature simply by claiming that a state constitutional provision gave the courts the authority to make whatever rules it thought appropriate for the conduct of a fair election. See Art. I, §4, cl. 1; Art. II, §1, cl. 2.
For these reasons, the question presented by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision calls out for review by this Court—as both the State Republican and Democratic Parties agreed when the former applied for a stay. But I reluctantly conclude that there is simply not enough time at this late date to decide the question before the election.
That does not mean, however, that the state court decision must escape our review. Although the Court denies the motion to expedite, the petition for certiorari remains before us, and if it is granted, the case can then be decided under a shortened schedule. In addition, the Court’s denial of the motion to expedite is not a denial of a request for this Court to order that ballots received after election day be segregated so that if the State Supreme Court’s decision is ultimately overturned, a targeted remedy will be available. Petitioner represents that it will apply to this Court to obtain that modest relief, Reply in Support of Motion for Expedited Review 3, and Respondent DPP agrees that such relief is appropriate, Opp. to Motion for Expedited Review 7. Although the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected Petitioner’s request for that relief, we have been informed by the Pennsylvania Attorney General that the Secretary of the Commonwealth issued guidance today directing county boards of elections to segregate ballots received between 8:00 p.m. on November 3, 2020, and 5:00 p.m. on November 6, 2020. Nothing in the Court’s order today precludes Petitioner from applying to this Court for relief if, for some reason, it is not satisfied with the Secretary’s guidance.

Will she be recused from hearing the Texas lawsuit as well?

Absolutely not. The only reason she recused herself from this decision was due to time - she had only just been sworn in, and said she didn't feel she had enough time to properly review everything. If I was her, I would have requested that she be allowed time...

I can see Justice Roberts siding once more with the liberals, but was there ever a lower court order ruling to stand should it ends in a tied 4-4 vote again?

Roberts did side with the lefties, that is what created this mess - or, maybe, opportunity...

Thanks ever so much tanstaafl.

I am a Pennsylvania resident but still have a hard time researching legal matters.
I feel like there is more hope that this debacle of an election may yet be rectified.

Most of the regular posters must be in a different time zone than me, it seems awfully quiet here around my coffee cup. LOL

THANKS AGAIN!!!

originally posted by: Frodolives
Thanks ever so much tanstaafl.

I am a Pennsylvania resident but still have a hard time researching legal matters.
I feel like there is more hope that this debacle of an election may yet be rectified.

Most of the regular posters must be in a different time zone than me, it seems awfully quiet here around my coffee cup. LOL

THANKS AGAIN!!!

a calm before a storm

Our PA state Governor Wolf decreed more Covid sanctions from Dec 12 thru January 4th (may be extended).
He is going to absolutely kill restaurants and bars this holiday season. Mask wearers used to tolerate non maskers. I believe it was because they know they are usless but go along. The mood seems to be shifting to anger from the looks I get. The maskers seem to be angry. I think that are upset that if they have to live the lie, then you must also.

We need this election sorted out soon and then Trump can step into this controlled burn of the nation by the Covidians

I've not seen this mentioned... #DevilStorm

82nd Airborne Facebook posts





I mean, it's meant to be a training exercise... but ya know... it says "The Storm is upon us" ...exact same capitalisation of Storm as Q post 55.



Of course, it might be nothing... but given that things really SHOULD be happening in the coming week, seems like odd timing. A cover? Anyway, thought I'd share. Just seemed interesting, given the timing of it. (The posts above are from the last couple of days.

a reply to: dashen

Have sent ok ??

a reply to: bradychick

Cheers brady chick for the TYPO steer!

There's actually two tweets with typos... decodes incoming... just noticed you updated and caught the second one too!

THE SECOND TYPO IS MAJOR COMMS... "It's about the BREAK"... see #318, which cross references #365

Q !ITPb.qbhqo ID: 571cae No.60523 📁
Dec 9 2017 14:01:00 (EST)

Anonymous ID: 8614a6 No.60476 📁
Dec 9 2017 13:55:39 (EST)
I'm about to BREAK

RIP Chester Bennington and Chris Cornell. They tried to move on Geffen and paid the price.

>>60476
"The" vs "To."
Everything has meaning.
Q

Bolded timestamp encodes today, Dec 11th!

IT'S ON... LIKE DONKY KONG!!!


And, yes, that "I just want to stop the world from killing itself!" tweet struck a chord with me too.

I have to believe that these justices are all acutely aware of the Biden Chinese connections by now. Surely that should come into thier decision making on this matter.

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

I also noticed that a post on Twitter and Gab were slightly different - not sure if it was intentional or if POTUS even runs the Gab one but here are the screenshots of both

link to gab


twitter