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

a reply to: poncho1982

I don't think you realize the flood gates that would open if the Supreme Court even hear this case, let alone rule how you want them. It would mire pretty much every election in states suing other states over the results.

For example, in 2018 the courts ruled that the Republican majority legislature of Pennsylvania violated the law in the 2016 election by drawing districts that unfairly favored Republicans. Should Democrat states be allowed to sue Pennsylvania to have those results overturned? What's to stop all the Democrat states from suing every Republican state after every election on grounds that their districts may be illegally gerrymandered?

In no world does the Supreme Court rule in favor of Texas in this case. If they did it would be giving all election authority from here on out to the courts completely tearing up the Constitution.

Texas just replied.

a reply to: poncho1982

You really think this will happen?

If the Supreme Court does the unthinkable and invalidates several states, do you think the will declare the guy who has 8 million less votes the winner?

Imagine if the Republican candidate had 8 million more votes, you would say suck it up liberal snowflakes you lost, add insults.....

As I said before, the cognitive dissonance on display is incredible. Surely some are using this site as a good study on the behavior.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: poncho1982

I don't think you realize the flood gates that would open if the Supreme Court even hear this case, let alone rule how you want them. It would mire pretty much every election in states suing other states over the results.

For example, in 2018 the courts ruled that the Republican majority legislature of Pennsylvania violated the law in the 2016 election by drawing districts that unfairly favored Republicans. Should Democrat states be allowed to sue Pennsylvania to have those results overturned? What's to stop all the Democrat states from suing every Republican state after every election on grounds that their districts may be illegally gerrymandered?

In no world does the Supreme Court rule in favor of Texas in this case. If they did it would be giving all election authority from here on out to the courts completely tearing up the Constitution.

Then why bother having a Constitution if states don’t care if it’s violated or not? Those swing states violated constitutional laws, period. Those votes which were illegal need to be tossed. Lessons learned the hard way. We can’t have this happen again.

originally posted by: mtnshredder
Those votes which were illegal need to be tossed.

You should talk to Texas. They don't want 'illegal votes tossed', they want ALL votes tossed.

Which is why their petition will be tossed.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Why should everyone be disenfranchised by a system wide open to fraud and shielded from public scrutiny?

You don't have to answer that. I already made my mind up years ago. The HAVA and NVRA were the worst pieces of legislation to ever happen to voters. They are being used to protect frauds and give them easy access to ballots when they are supposed to protect eligible voters and give them easy access to ballots.

The Voting Rights Act protects my right to make my vote effective. I can't do that if I am not even permitted to inspect the same info as other parties with an interest.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
Why should everyone be disenfranchised by a system wide open to fraud and shielded from public scrutiny?

Being that no one has proved that 'everyone' was 'disenfranchised', or for that matter that there was any wide spread fraud, it's a moot point.

a reply to: mtnshredder

So you would prefer for the Supreme Court to throw out millions of votes and essentially take supreme control of all branches of government at every level of government?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Are you against using the "Big Ask" strategy?

a reply to: Butterfinger

I'm against the Attorney General of Texas being a giant dumbass.

Some of us already knew this, but it is worth posting again. It explains the hypocrisy of the lawsuit.

The real reason Paxton filed the lawsuit:
GOP Senator Ben Sasse Suggests Texas AG Looking for Trump Pardon With SCOTUS Lawsuit

"I'm no lawyer, but I suspect the Supreme Court swats this away. From the brief, it looks like a fella begging for a pardon filed a PR stunt rather than a lawsuit—as all of the assertions have already been rejected by federal courts and Texas' own solicitor general isn't signing on," Sasse told The Washington Examiner on Thursday

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: poncho1982

You really think this will happen?

If the Supreme Court does the unthinkable and invalidates several states, do you think the will declare the guy who has 8 million less votes the winner?

Imagine if the Republican candidate had 8 million more votes, you would say suck it up liberal snowflakes you lost, add insults.....

As I said before, the cognitive dissonance on display is incredible. Surely some are using this site as a good study on the behavior.

The problem here is a direct refusal to see and to admit that Biden did not fairly get that many votes, that it was done by fraud because they knew Trump was winning. It’s why they had to stop the count overnight so they could bring in fake ballots behind the scenes and throw out Republican poll watchers. Why so many are defending this is truly a travesty, it’s like a brainwashing or a strange virus, and oh yah they used the virus as a pretext for the fraudulent mail in voting. This is really serious and the fact that people want it not to be true and refuse to see it is really scary.

The constitution provides multiple solutions for election’s conflict. Looks like there is clear conflict and that process should play out as the constitution dictates.

originally posted by: jrod
Some of us already knew this, but it is worth posting again. It explains the hypocrisy of the lawsuit.

The real reason Paxton filed the lawsuit:
GOP Senator Ben Sasse Suggests Texas AG Looking for Trump Pardon With SCOTUS Lawsuit

"I'm no lawyer, but I suspect the Supreme Court swats this away. From the brief, it looks like a fella begging for a pardon filed a PR stunt rather than a lawsuit—as all of the assertions have already been rejected by federal courts and Texas' own solicitor general isn't signing on," Sasse told The Washington Examiner on Thursday

If Trump needed a pardon it. An only be because of the hateful attacks on him, as he has done nothing wrong. It’s the Biden’s snd the Pelosis and the Schumers who ate the crooks. It’s so sickening I don’t know how anyone can stomach what is happening to our Republic, but it’s definitely a communist coup so if you are for it... do I need to spell it out more?

originally posted by: MrBadExample

originally posted by: carewemust
Today, Six of the states have upgraded their support to the level of co-Plaintiffs, with Texas and President Trump.

Source: twitter.com...

Let's be honest here. Why does anyone think the SC will even consider taking the case, much less whiz all over the rights of states to conduct elections as their legislators and officials (both Dem and Rep) see fit?

There is a better chance of Tom Petty suddenly appearing from beyond the veil and singing, presumably for the Constitution, "Dont Do Me Like That".

It's not going to happen.

They are taking the case as I posted, and Ted Cruz is on board to argue the case. He is seriously one of thee best lawyers. Have you heard him filibuster ?

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: jrod
Some of us already knew this, but it is worth posting again. It explains the hypocrisy of the lawsuit.

The real reason Paxton filed the lawsuit:
GOP Senator Ben Sasse Suggests Texas AG Looking for Trump Pardon With SCOTUS Lawsuit

"I'm no lawyer, but I suspect the Supreme Court swats this away. From the brief, it looks like a fella begging for a pardon filed a PR stunt rather than a lawsuit—as all of the assertions have already been rejected by federal courts and Texas' own solicitor general isn't signing on," Sasse told The Washington Examiner on Thursday

If Trump needed a pardon it. An only be because of the hateful attacks on him, as he has done nothing wrong. It’s the Biden’s snd the Pelosis and the Schumers who ate the crooks. It’s so sickening I don’t know how anyone can stomach what is happening to our Republic, but it’s definitely a communist coup so if you are for it... do I need to spell it out more?

Let’s work on spelling out that first bit correctly, then you can get on with whatever you’re getting on about.

I’m assuming you didn’t read the link (hard to tell from your first two “sentences”). This isn’t about Trump seeking a pardon. Paxton is of the same ilk of crooks you’re ranting about and is facing prison time unless Uncle Donnie steps in with a pardon. Logic would follow that Paxton, being the AG of Texas, a state that did the exact same thing he’s crying foul about, is doing this in hopes to get a pardon from Uncle Donnie.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Texas just replied.

Kent Paxton just replied. There's a whole bunch of us Texans who are hopping mad about Paxton and his shenanegans.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: MrBadExample

originally posted by: carewemust
Today, Six of the states have upgraded their support to the level of co-Plaintiffs, with Texas and President Trump.

Source: twitter.com...

Let's be honest here. Why does anyone think the SC will even consider taking the case, much less whiz all over the rights of states to conduct elections as their legislators and officials (both Dem and Rep) see fit?

There is a better chance of Tom Petty suddenly appearing from beyond the veil and singing, presumably for the Constitution, "Dont Do Me Like That".

It's not going to happen.

They are taking the case as I posted, and Ted Cruz is on board to argue the case. He is seriously one of thee best lawyers. Have you heard him filibuster ?

"...seriously one of the best lawyers"???

There's a whole lotta legal eagles here in Texas who would disagree with that.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

They are taking the case as I posted,

Source?

originally posted by: Byrd
Kent Paxton just replied.

Yeah, he did, but sadly he's speaking for the State.