Constitutional Lawyer Reveals Trump's Killshot to Defeat Voter Fraud

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
The Texas case is it. Will the Supreme Court take action? They will be under extreme political pressure. Under pressure from the media. All they have to decide is......... Did these rogue States violate the electors clause? If they did...... What is the remedy? And the remedy is, It goes to the House to vote by delegation. And if the Supreme Court directs that. Trump wins the election. End of story.

If the Supreme Court fails to act. The States can also do all this on their own, without them.

Constitutional Lawyer Reveals Trump's Killshot to Defeat Voter Fraud

This suit has a zero percent chance of success. End of story.

And the reason for that would be...........................................?

originally posted by: DupontDeux

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Is that link to banned video, owned by Alex Jones?

Yep, and it is also a lawyer that represents Alex Jones' himself.

(which at the very least means that he has a vested interest in interpreting the relevant laws in a maner that pleases his client)

Hopefully it pleases the SCOTUS also.

originally posted by: johnnylaw16

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
The Texas case is it. Will the Supreme Court take action? They will be under extreme political pressure. Under pressure from the media. All they have to decide is......... Did these rogue States violate the electors clause? If they did...... What is the remedy? And the remedy is, It goes to the House to vote by delegation. And if the Supreme Court directs that. Trump wins the election. End of story.

If the Supreme Court fails to act. The States can also do all this on their own, without them.

Constitutional Lawyer Reveals Trump's Killshot to Defeat Voter Fraud

This suit has a zero percent chance of success. End of story.

"In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups. The police who investigate crime and the district attorneys who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories."

DUN DUN

Let me ask you this why do attorneys take cases pro bono knowing they are going to fail?

Can't really say fame as the only ones getting any air time and even that's restricted more and more

Rudy G is already famous
to a certain extent so is Lin Wood
maybe Sidney Powell but she was/is well known within lawyer circles

Arizona and Florida just joined the Texas lawsuit. 19 or 20 states now.

electionwiz.com...

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Arizona and Florida just joined the Texas lawsuit. 19 or 20 states now.

electionwiz.com...

Ruh-ro. PN and WI still good to be confirmed as completely fraud-free?

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Arizona and Florida just joined the Texas lawsuit. 19 or 20 states now.

electionwiz.com...

supreme court

Not joined the lawsuit. for leave to file amicus brief submitted

have a nice day

originally posted by: highvein

originally posted by: DupontDeux

originally posted by: nonspecific
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Is that link to banned video, owned by Alex Jones?

Yep, and it is also a lawyer that represents Alex Jones' himself.

(which at the very least means that he has a vested interest in interpreting the relevant laws in a maner that pleases his client)

Hopefully it pleases the SCOTUS also.

Well, that is a matter of opinion.

I don't really want Trump to win, but I really want SCOTUS (and America at large for that matter) to take these allegations seriously, and to recognize how inherently flawed and democratically unsafe the US way of conducting elections is.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

It is high-level election fraud when election officials override the state legislature.

That is the foundation of the Texas lawsuit that 18 other states are officially supporting.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Killshot my arse.

It's a failed Mary.

Taxi for Mungo situation.

If ever there was one.

"Donald where's your trousers".

Denied.

a reply to: andy06shake



I know little about things but I'm fairly confident this will fail.

ill say it again for those in the back. if SCOTUS refuses to defend the Constitution I will consider America to be a "lawless State". If the government wont follow the law no one else should have to.

originally posted by: dragonridr
The supreme court is not going to invalidate millions of votes, If they did that would vioate everything this country stands for. This would totally destroy democracy in this country and we would just be moving to dictatorship.

So you think they will invalidate the votes of people in 46 states, just because a few states broke the law and screwed over their voters.

If they did that, it would violate everything this country stands for!

a reply to: LookingAtMars

this is a curious train of thought. please tell me in what law it says "what america stands for" is the raw vote of the rabble.

a reply to: tribal

America stands for freedom, truth and justice.

At least it did at one time.

ETA - And I am not sure what you are saying here.

Why would that be in a law?

ETA - This is a cut and dry case. These states clearly did not follow the law. There is no argument.

dragonridr

So you think they will invalidate the votes of people in 46 states, just because a few states broke the law and screwed over their voters.
Textjust because a few states broke the law and screwed over their voters.

If they did that, it would violate everything this country stands for!

Those few states were strategically targeted because they could flip the entire election.. (see Patrick Byrne video on Electric Universe's thread-sorry, on crummy fone and can't link it) So.. Yeah.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Killshot my arse.

It's a failed Mary.

Taxi for Mungo situation.

If ever there was one.

"Donald where's your trousers".

Denied.

Uhhh , WHAT ?
Can you put that in English please ?
Preferably US English...

originally posted by: OldBlueEyes
Can you please give us a jest of what the man is saying, its not a short video, looks edited cheaply and its info wars.

thanks

Surely you "jest"
I think you meant "gist"

originally posted by: dragonridr
The supreme court is not going to invalidate millions of votes, If they did that would vioate everything this country stands for. This would totally destroy democracy in this country and we would just be moving to dictatorship.

What ?
I believe invalidating millions of illegal votes would be the best thing to do.
Unlike some , I despise "illegal"

Here's the problem the SCOTUS doesn't like to make would changing rulings. They'd rather see the status quo continue... and that means Joe Biden wins the presidency.

Republicans should have cheated better themselves if they wanted to defeated the Democrats. Their heart just wasn't in it; they don't want Trump leading their party ... he was bad for business.

originally posted by: dragonridr
The supreme court is not going to invalidate millions of votes...

If the Supreme Court finds that the vote counts were tainted with illegal votes, then it's the illegal votes invalidating every legal vote.

If they did that would vioate everything this country stands for.

No. In fact, that would uphold and uplift everything this country stands for. It's a proud day when election integrity is protected and preserved. No one has a right to be president... but We The People have a right to free and fair elections, in accordance with our right to a republican form of government. This country can survive another contested election. We cannot survive rigged fraudulent elections.

This would totally destroy democracy in this country and we would just be moving to dictatorship.

We do not have a democracy to destroy. We have a Constitutional Republic to protect and preserve.