7 States Join Texas Lawsuit to Overturn UNCONSTITUTIONAL Election, Its Happening

originally posted by: carewemust
The city of Detroit just filed an amicus brief supporting Michigan and the other three defendant States.

mobile.twitter.com...

The lack of concern for the integrity of this election is deafening. Why all the deflection for the truth to come out in regards to a legal and fair election?

Allow the machines and USB’s to be forensically investigated as well as the signatures and chain of custody to be investigated for compliance to the State’s Constitutional laws. Who would have a problem with that in order to shed some light on the truth?

a reply to: mtnshredder
Well, if they get caught cheating, and bitch slapped down for it, it probably won't work anymore. They will have to try and find a new way to steal elections. That's probably a scary thought to them. Plus, they might get hung from a lightpost by the people that got screwed out of their vote due to their shinanigans

a reply to: MotherMayEye

And what they say is "There was no fraud"

originally posted by: carewemust
The city of Detroit just filed an amicus brief supporting Michigan and the other three defendant States.

mobile.twitter.com...

I could only get through some of it. What they've written about Melissa Carrone is pure crap. She is not 'untrained.' She was the only one there who was trained and she already addressed all the things they claimed 'she didn't understand.'

Detroit is out of its depth. They didn't even have the fancy shmancy calligraphy in their SCOTUS header. Bah.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: carewemust
The city of Detroit just filed an amicus brief supporting Michigan and the other three defendant States.

mobile.twitter.com...

I could only get through some of it. What they've written about Melissa Carrone is pure crap. She is not 'untrained.' She was the only one there who was trained and she already addressed all the things they claimed 'she didn't understand.'

Detroit is out of its depth. They didn't even have the fancy shmancy calligraphy in their SCOTUS header. Bah.

The weak responses to the allegations isn’t going to help their credibility in their counter arguments to come. Shhhhh, don’t tell them, let them keep talking.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

So since it has been a day (told you to wait) the website has been updated.

SCOTUS

a reply to: Ahabstar

Dr. Linda Lee Tarver in the latest. Fabulous. I loved what she had to say in the Michigan hearings.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
So since it has been a day (told you to wait) the website has been updated.

Uh, thanks? But I've been posting the updates all day.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Just wanted you to know that it is Texas, et al V Pennsylvania, et al.

So in the future the question can be asked of future SC nominees if they would overturn Texas, et al V Pennsylvania, et al in addition to the fear question of not overturning Roe V Wade....which was also a Texas case coincidentally.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Just wanted you to know that it is Texas, et al V Pennsylvania, et al.

It is not Texas, et. al., it's only Texas, they are the sole Plaintiff.

originally posted by: mtnshredder

originally posted by: carewemust
The city of Detroit just filed an amicus brief supporting Michigan and the other three defendant States.

mobile.twitter.com...

The lack of concern for the integrity of this election is deafening. Why all the deflection for the truth to come out in regards to a legal and fair election?

Allow the machines and USB’s to be forensically investigated as well as the signatures and chain of custody to be investigated for compliance to the State’s Constitutional laws. Who would have a problem with that in order to shed some light on the truth?

That is indeed one aspect which must be investigated.

Another is why the paper ballot rejection rate is so miniscule, compared to past elections.

Of course the Supreme Court is being asked to focus on the high-level law violations by election officials in 4 states.

As of 10:00pm 12-10-2020

Here is a map of the (now) 21 states supporting the TEXAS lawsuit against WI-MI-GA-PA.

Along with a "Thank-you!" from Texas Attorney General KEN PAXTON.

Source for both: twitter.com...

originally posted by: carewemust
As of 10:00pm 12-10-2020

Here is a map of the (now) 21 states supporting the TEXAS lawsuit against WI-MI-GA-PA.

Along with a "Thank-you!" from Texas Attorney General KEN PAXTON.

Source for both: twitter.com...

Already deleted from Twatter!

originally posted by: TheGoondockSaint

originally posted by: carewemust
As of 10:00pm 12-10-2020

Here is a map of the (now) 21 states supporting the TEXAS lawsuit against WI-MI-GA-PA.

Along with a "Thank-you!" from Texas Attorney General KEN PAXTON.

Source for both: twitter.com...

Already deleted from Twatter!

Twitter is risking a lot by removing Tweets from legal officials, like state Attorney Generals!

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey must be scared shi'tless that we're going to find out which state officials he gave over $300 million dollars to, prior to the Presidential election last month.

Anyway, the article that Texas Attorney General Paxton linked-to in his tweet...the one with the map of states supporting Texas, is still live at the publisher.

Link to the NationalFile.com article: nationalfile.com...

Looks like Ted Cruz is going to argue the case before the Supreme Court! www.lifenews.com... plUyY1e99SZ7L50X1c8UlzjI

a reply to: MotherMayEye

LOOK at what the SCOTUS told PA officials, regarding their ignoring of laws laid out by the state legislature.

Important statement from the U.S. Supreme Court, directed to the Pennsylvania Secretary of State, PA Supreme Court, Governor Tom Wolf, and others..

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.

Source: www.supremecourt.gov...

a reply to: Phage

Hello Phange, Election law is tricky. Individual states make their own election law in their legislatures.

Each state must follow the law they make for themselves. Texas is asking the court to find that some states did not follow

their own law and Texas has been hurt by this action.

originally posted by: Phage

Why not? Trash is trash.
"We don't like what those other states did. Erase their votes."

Right.


But tell me, are those states on the docket?

The only trash is the BS people like you keep posting...

Those states decided to ignore their own voter laws & rules. I know those of you in the left seem to think that local officials, whom are not the legislature of that state, and judges can make up new laws if they want and they don't have to follow their own laws/rules, but in fact this is still a country of laws, unless you are a socialist or a communist/or former democrat", then you think to you LAWS don't apply...

The flippant attitude of those on the left about this lawsuit is very telling. They're scared. this has nothing to do with the obvious fraud. It's a Constitutional case.

This is a serious case, and Texas and the now 25 states have a perfectly valid claim that the SC will have a very difficult time ruling against.

Violating the US constitution and State Constitutions in a national election is about as serious of a situation we could have.

I predict a very angry electorate on the left after this.

But who they should be angry at are the States that did this, not the States who sued to remedy their unconstitutional actions.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Let's say the courts end up siding with your interpretation. Do you really think they are going to throw out millions of votes cast by voters who were told they were adhering to the law due to a technicality? That would do more to undermine our election process than anything the governments' of these states are accused.