ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, November 29, 2020

A review of the PA Supreme Court decision

I asked the lawyer who previously reviewed Sidney Powell's GA filing to look at the recent PA Supreme Court ruling. He graciously consented to share his thoughts, which follow.

So here’s my brief take on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Decision. The usual disclaimers in this case are that I do not practice in Pennsylvania State courts, nor is election law my typical case. Nonetheless, several things stand out to me.

Before addressing those issues, let me clarify a few things. Court decisions must be interpreted in light of several factors, not least of which is: 1) what is the court that is issuing the opinion; and 2) what is the relief sought?

In this case, it is a Pennsylvania state court and the plaintiff were seeking an order prohibiting certifying the results of the election. Both of these are significant. It is significant that it is a state court because state courts generally are not viewed as intellectually rigorous as federal courts. Further, federal courts are viewed, rightly or wrongly, as less partisan than state courts. Federal courts also can address federal and state issues while state courts are typically limited to state issues. There are exceptions but I’m not going to go into them now.

The remedy at this point is also significant. Generally speaking, there are two types of remedies: legal and equitable. Legal remedies are usually monetary damages after something has occurred. Equitable remedies are court orders to make someone act in a certain way, either to do something or refrain from doing something. At common law, legal and equitable courts were different. In most US courts, whether federal or state, they are merged.

So the original PA complaint starts by saying, “The amendments to the mail-in voting rules were not lawfully passed. So, this court should not allow mail-in votes that were authorized under those statutes.” There was a flurry of filings and activity at the beginning of this week about that. In the middle of it, the PA Secretary of State ‘certified’ the ballot. Once that was done, the defendants tried to claim that the case was moot, or that there was no need to go further. The trial court said, “No, there are several other things the Secretary of State has to do before the certification is proper so it is not moot.” 

The trial court judge is a Republican. PA as a state allows partisan elections for judges. The PA Supreme Court has 2 Republicans and 5 Democrats. The trial court judge ultimately found that the laws amending the mail-in ballots were not approved according to the rules for modifying PA statutes. So, she said, “You cannot count those votes.” The defendants appealed.

Here is where it gets interesting. At common law, equitable cases had a variety of doctrines and defenses that did not apply for legal remedies. As one example, one who seeks a suit in equity must come with ‘clean hands.’ So if you can show that the plaintiff engaged in illegitimate behavior, you can argue that the plaintiff should not get an equitable decision even if that decision might otherwise be justified.

Another equitable doctrine is ‘laches,’ which means that you have to timely act. It is a defense that essentially says, “Plaintiffs took too long to make their claim.” Note that a laches defense does not address the merits of the underlying argument. It is solely a procedural claim.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court relied upon laches and said, “This law went into effect a year ago and none of the Plaintiffs did anything about it.” The opinion notes that the plaintiffs did nothing upon the law’s passing. The PA Supreme Court says, “They waited until millions cast their vote” so they will not allow the suit to go forward.

However, there is another legal doctrine, one called ‘standing’. Standing simply means that you yourself have to suffered an injury. Think of environmental groups that try to stop the Navy from using sonar to map the ocean floor because the use of sonar damages whales and dolphins. Courts typically say, “Even if you are 100% right, you aren’t being injured. And you do not have the capacity to sue for the whales and dolphins. You do not have standing to bring suit.” And they then dismiss the suit. No joke. There are several reported decisions about this.

The key to laches it that the delay has to be unreasonable. So if you learn that your city is going to bulldoze a public playground where you take your children, you cannot wait until the playground is razed and they start putting up the apartment complex to file your suit. The PA Supreme Court, without any discussion of the merits, just said, “You’re too late. You lose.” The PA Supreme Court has 5 Dems and 2 Rs. The Rs concurred but said there should be a hearing about the problems with the votes. They essentially said, “Voiding every mail in ballot is too much right now so we would void the trial court order, but we would let the claims go forward and see where that leads.” Put another way, if the evidence shows that X% of the mail-in ballots were fraudulent, we would not oppose striking those ballots, but we aren’t going to grant a blank check at this stage of the game.”

Realistically, given current standing doctrine, there is no way Plaintiffs could have succeeded if they raised this challenge prior to this election. Any potential injury would be too speculative. That is, if they filed suit in December, 2019, the ruling from the court would have been “Plaintiffs challenge how this became law but Plaintiffs do not allege that they are injured in any way. Some of the Plaintiffs announce their intention to run for office but it is not clear whether they will or if they will succeed in the primaries or if any votes would go their way or not. Because they cannot point to an actual injury, they lack standing to assert these claims. Case dismissed.”

Further, if a law is unconstitutional for whatever reason, it can be challenged at any given time. Constitutionality is like jurisdiction: one does not need to assert it to preserve it. So even if a case is tried and lost, you can raise jurisdiction on appeal and argue for the first time that the lower court had no jurisdiction. Not likely the best way to argue a case, and might have the courts thinking that such an argument is just a Hail Mary that won’t go anywhere, but arguing that the statute is unconstitutional will not be dismissed with a blithe “You’re too late” opinion from the court. 

So where does this leave the Plaintiffs? There is now nothing preventing them from seeking Supreme Court review. This does not mean that the Supreme Court will take it but it does mean that there are enough opinions that the Supreme Court can take it. Will they?

Maybe. It comes from a state Supreme Court on an incomplete record. The trial court had issued an order and was anticipating hearings that would develop evidence. That did not happen and the PA Supreme Court certainly did nothing to develop a factual record. But the trial court did consider the evidence before it (primarily affidavits) and relied upon that evidence to issue an injunction. The Supreme Court could pass on this case. That does not mean they agree with the PA Supreme Court. It could just mean that there is an insufficient factual record for them to adequately rule.

The U.S. Supreme Court could revive the injunction, send it to the trial court with an order for further evidence and delay a final ruling until the evidence is developed so the parties can know which ballots are a real problem and which cannot be verified. The Supreme Court could also issue a ruling that problematic ballots cannot be counted and remand the matter to a trial court to determine what mail-in ballots did not comply with PA laws prior to the enactment of their new mail-in-balloting scheme. 

There is a Third Circuit opinion that denied the Trump campaign’s petitions. That could be appealed as well. It could be that the Third Circuit case and this case are combined with directions on how to handle the PA issues.

Given the number of cases that are pending, I would bet that the USSC would take some type of case if for no other reason that it would give guidelines to lower courts, including appellate courts, for how to decide these cases in the future. In 2000, Bush v Gore was just the state of Florida. Here, we are dealing with Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Nevada. Those states have differing election laws and criteria. Realizing the challenging occurring elsewhere, it might be worthwhile for them to take PA now to issue rulings to guide other courts.

And if those other states are still in contention by December 8, those elections could be referred to their state legislatures for the legislature to appoint a board of electors.

I make no claim about what will happen. I know courts prefer to make as narrow ruling as possible, everything else considered. If the USSC can say, “PA’s rules about mail-in-ballots are not legitimate and so those votes cannot be counted,” that is far more limited than throwing out the whole election and they would prefer that if at all possible. Such a ruling could guide any number of states, including GA. Time is rapidly dwindling for courts to make a decision about whether they will decide the dispute or whether they will declare that state elections have not been decided and it goes to the state legislatures.

Until then, nunc pugnamus.

Labels: ,

51 Comments:

Blogger Chip Hazard November 29, 2020 5:14 AM  

In my own legal experience, even faced with clear evidence and overwhelming odds to the contrary, State (and District) judges can and will ignore and/or dismiss it, simply to avoid dealing with the law.

Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Nevada.

There's really no room for avoidance.


Blogger crescent wrench November 29, 2020 5:20 AM  

The only way to foil this CCP operation to undermine the vote would be to order a re-vote and enjoin the federal government from operating beyond a "frozen" capacity until the re-vote can occur.

Voiding millions of ballots will cause the half of the nation who still depend upon the evening news to lose faith in the vote in the same way Trump's contingent feel theirs to be under threat now.

The question is whether the 9 idiots in black robes can comprehend the importance of what they're adjudicating and twist whatever needs to be twisted to arrive at the ruling to re-vote.

Blogger Trooper Dean November 29, 2020 5:29 AM  

Thank you for your analysis. Very well written

Blogger Trooper Dean November 29, 2020 5:30 AM  

T

Blogger Steve Samson November 29, 2020 5:38 AM  

Thanks Vox for doing the leg-work seeking out expert opinions for us to read. I'm sure I'm not alone in getting a little lost in all the legal intricacies.

Blogger mobius November 29, 2020 6:01 AM  

Thank you.

Blogger Brett baker November 29, 2020 6:02 AM  

Man, the Establishment will do anything to make Bidala President.

Blogger Nostromo November 29, 2020 6:43 AM  

I think Rudy and his team have quite clearly proven that the mail in votes in Pennsylvania are unconstitutional. They went with this argument instead of alleging out right fraud because it is a shotgun approach to clearing enough Biden votes so that Trump wins. Pull the trigger, and BLAM! 2 million votes, the majority for Biden are gone! They miscalculated at how far into a pretzel Zog and his minions would twist logic to deny reality. Now, if a suit is brought to challenge induvidual fraudulent votes, I am certain the PASC would rule that the "laches" requirement has lapsed. That Alito ordered them to sequester the mail in ballots for just this occasion is telling. He foresaw this challenge. That Pa ignored his order would indicate the SecofState of Pa just flipped Alito the bird. I do not imagine he will be pleased.

Blogger Done with it all November 29, 2020 6:44 AM  

The courts are playing with fire. A civil war is not out of the realm of possibility. The courts better right this wrong or there will be a revolt on so many fronts this could get out of control.

Blogger Doom November 29, 2020 7:00 AM  

crescent wrench wrote:The only way to foil this CCP operation to undermine the vote would be to order a re-vote and enjoin the federal government from operating beyond a "frozen" capacity until the re-vote can occur.

Voiding millions of ballots will cause the half of the nation who still depend upon the evening news to lose faith in the vote in the same way Trump's contingent feel theirs to be under threat now.

The question is whether the 9 idiots in black robes can comprehend the importance of what they're adjudicating and twist whatever needs to be twisted to arrive at the ruling to re-vote.


Honestly? It is only about a third of the electorate. Further? I don't give a flying fig about their trust in the election, especially given how many of them were in smaller, or larger, parts, party to the fraud(s). And have been a party to fraud for decades, one way or another.

Let them eat lead, if required. Further, any of them proven to have cheated, by voting twice, voting for the dead, using the ballots for others, etc. should all be stripped of all voting privileges for life and the ability to be involved with elections at any level.

A boy can dream.

Blogger Jack Tanner November 29, 2020 7:15 AM  

God, Leftists are such lowlife scumbags. Verminous pieces of street shit, all of them.

Blogger Jamie-R November 29, 2020 7:26 AM  

I still think State Legislatures will make the decisions, but it may be after one state is voided. Detroit's absolute sham by the losers who couldn't even qualify to serve in the Bloods and Crips would be the likely one, taking out Michigan.

It's noteworthy that Pence was at Dover too, seeing American soldiers remains being returned, helicopter crash in Egypt they say? Sure. I bet they didn't bring the CIA bodies back from Frankfurt. They can die a disgrace.

Blogger Nolan K November 29, 2020 7:43 AM  

Great analysis, especially on the legal issues of equity, standing, and laches. Steve Turley was explaining on YouTube how the Pennsylvania Constitution only allows four types of voters to use mail-in ballots, which are narrow in scope. Applying this standard would eliminate most of the mail-in ballots and make Trump the victor, but even if this strict standard is ignored by the courts, there is still the issue of the ballots received after 8 pm on election night. Justice Alito has already written that these votes are dubious because they were allowed by the Secretary of State and not the Pennsylvania Legislature as required by the 12th Amendment to the US Constitution. Eliminating the post 8 pm votes would give Trump the win in Pennsylvania. When one state is flipped back to Trump, the rest of the states will soon follow, and the media will no longer be able to maintain a blackout.

Blogger Doom November 29, 2020 7:44 AM  

Jamie-R wrote:It's noteworthy that Pence was at Dover too, seeing American soldiers remains being returned, helicopter crash in Egypt they say? Sure. I bet they didn't bring the CIA bodies back from Frankfurt. They can die a disgrace.

You bring cheer and a smile to my face.

Blogger Student in Blue November 29, 2020 7:46 AM  

I wonder how Justice Alito's previous interaction with this matter would change how the USSC approach this. The writer didn't address that, sadly.

Blogger crescent wrench November 29, 2020 7:57 AM  

I'm interested in whether any of these guys have raw math in their filings.

I've run binomials against these ballot dumps and the numbers are absurd, even assuming a washington d.c. probability of 93% for Biden.

When your denominators for "at least this many successes" have literally a thousand zeroes in them, you shouldn't need to present any other evidence.


Blogger Shakey November 29, 2020 8:11 AM  

So basically, the SC might take the case, but then they might not, largely on the back of a lack of evidence. There is a lack of evidence because the lower court ruling - which was planning on having evidentiary hearings - was overturned, at what appears to be a breakneck legal pace no less, by the Dem-biased Pennsylvania State SC, who in-turn did not address or view any of the evidence, thus creating an environment wherein the USSC lacks evidence to support a decision.

It's time to make tarring and feathering great again.

Blogger Troy Lee Messer November 29, 2020 8:18 AM  

American courts are no longer cloaked under any sense of legitimacy. They are cloaked under cheap, Chinese manufactured polyester and deserve all the respect that entails.

Blogger CM November 29, 2020 8:27 AM  

Realistically, given current standing doctrine, there is no way Plaintiffs could have succeeded if they raised this challenge prior to this election. Any potential injury would be too speculative.

I thought there was something like this in play - a catch 22 where you can't challenge anything no matter what.

Blogger JWM in SD November 29, 2020 8:35 AM  

Yeah, I'm honestly quite concerned about that. There's one half thst knows the election was stolen, one third on the opposite political side who are completely clueless, and 20% on thst same side who know it was stolen but doesn't care because they think that stealing elections is their divine right. That is a very volatile mix coming to a head in the next few weeks.

Blogger JWM in SD November 29, 2020 8:37 AM  

I agree but I think there is a high likely hood of chicanery to prevent that from happening. False flag, covid shutdowns, mysterious accidents.

Blogger Brutus November 29, 2020 8:59 AM  

The Biden team knew what to do and when to do it to secure victory. The Right had better wake up and see what is in front of them. Ridiculous, too many of you. As stupid as David Irving with this legal and court strategy. The street, on election night, was where the battle should have been fought. The only 4 am bundles of ballots to make it to election precincts should have been for Trump.

Get serious or stay used to journalist crowing about "denying a second term," and Jewish lesbians laying the law down to you.

As for Trump, all right, I'll give him right up to about the 1st week of January to see if there is anything to this Q and GE shit after all. After that, I don't care what they do to him or his family if it turns out he was nothing but either a con man or a fool. Letting that happen with the election is unforgivable. All those millions of people who thought he was their champion and going to stop what is happening to their country and people. Yes, I hope you are right and this is all 16-D chess that only the 99.98 percentile could grok before the trap is finally sprung here in the next week or two and why the mastermind was playing golf when the election was called for Biden.

Golf. Then AGAIN on the day of the march!

Blogger Gr8Again November 29, 2020 9:06 AM  

I'm feeling pretty blackpilled at the moment. It looks like the courts are going to do everything they can to sweep this under the rug. We all know there's fraud, they just won't allow any discovery to take place so plaintiffs can prove it.

Trump is going to have to take matters into his own hands. The courts aren't going to do it for him and the state legislatures aren't going to stick their necks out.

Blogger xevious2030 November 29, 2020 9:27 AM  

“It comes from a state Supreme Court on an incomplete record. […] It could just mean that there is an insufficient factual record for them to adequately rule.”

There is an aspect of the factual record that has been left out, in keeping with the the style of the lawyer. A number of people have been surprised by the recent changes in doctrine team Trump have undertaken. There is a tendency to gloss over certain aspects that are considered out of character. The incomplete record may not factor in at all, as relates to the paragraph.

Blogger VD November 29, 2020 9:39 AM  

I'm feeling pretty blackpilled at the moment.

Go cry somewhere else then, cucky. This isn't a place for people who think their feelings matter to anyone, much less determine the course of future events.

Blogger Attila is my bro November 29, 2020 9:40 AM  

I interpreted Trump's golf playing as a poke in the eye to the commies.

"What does he know that we don't? Why is he playing golf after we stole his election?"

Blogger VD November 29, 2020 9:40 AM  

As for Trump, all right, I'll give him right up to about the 1st week of January to see if there is anything to this Q and GE shit after all. After that, I don't care what they do to him or his family if it turns out he was nothing but either a con man or a fool.

No one cares what you do, think, or say. You will never be a woman.

Blogger Damelon Brinn November 29, 2020 9:50 AM  

The courts aren't going to do it for him and the state legislatures aren't going to stick their necks out.

The PA legislature has already started to stick its neck out. Why assume it will stop? And no one expected the PA Court that created the mail-in mess to undo it. Why be depressed that an enemy did what you expected it to do?

Blogger Arthur Isaac November 29, 2020 10:11 AM  

@Brutus "The street, on election night, was where the battle should have been fought."

So how'd you do? Can you link the headline?

Blogger Al From Bay Shore November 29, 2020 10:18 AM  

All these bizarre circumstances make it difficult to get blackpilled. These bizarre circumstances are things from the beginning of Trump's 2016 campaign up to the election.

- The rationale for NeverTrumpers to be "Never Trump" makes no sense.
- Trump's behavior at the Al Smith dinner
- Powell and Lin Wood placing the entirety of their good reputations on the line
- The results of the 2016 election
- The disappearance of Huber
- The sudden ineffectiveness of Jeff Sessions
- Mitt Romney giving support to Antifa
- The idea that something unconstitutional is constitutional if it is not pointed out in a timely fashion
- The number of SEVERE irregularities in the 2020 election
- Judge Emmett Sullivan

Those are only SOME of the bizarre things; there are more. None of this makes any sense.

And one more thing: there is precedent for a major American political party going extinct due to being perceived as treasonous. Type the following on a Google search engine: "Why did the Federalist party collapse?"

Blogger JWM in SD November 29, 2020 10:33 AM  

Look Vox, the deadline is the 14th. If something is going to happen it has to before that or it ain't happening.

Blogger Gregory the Tall November 29, 2020 10:43 AM  

I'm feeling pretty blackpilled at the moment.

File it under endogenous depression, objectively the future looks bright.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore November 29, 2020 10:44 AM  

Yet another bizarre thing. This is a text version of a selfie of me five minutes ago: smoking a cigarette in my garage because I just saw a Q post from 9/2/18 that said only one thing, Ezra Cohen-Watnick.

Blogger JG November 29, 2020 10:49 AM  

Did any of you really expect that a PA Supreme Court with a Democratic majority would rule for the GOP?

Don't forget that every lower court filing went against Bush in the 2000 hanging chad election, right up until Bush won in the Supreme Court.

The PA legislature or the US Supreme Court will have the final say in PA, not their partisan court.

Blogger Duh November 29, 2020 10:51 AM  

Interesting analysis. Looks like it's a catch 22 for the plaintiff - file early, no standing. File late,too late. Will be interesting to see if this goes to SCOTUS.

Blogger basementhomebrewer November 29, 2020 10:53 AM  

Court room is way outside my realm of expertise. Out of curiosity would it make sense for a sane district court to proceed to discovery instead of issuing an injunction? Would this prevent the PA SC from getting involved? It would allow for at least some fact finding, although time is getting short.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd November 29, 2020 10:53 AM  

Gr8Again wrote:I'm feeling pretty blackpilled at the moment. It looks like the courts are going to do everything they can to sweep this under the rug. We all know there's fraud, they just won't allow any discovery to take place so plaintiffs can prove it.
Golly gee, what a pity that Team Trump couldn't possibly have seen that coming and routed around it!

Or maybe they did.

Blogger FLOlson November 29, 2020 11:11 AM  

27. VD:

"No one cares what you do, think, or say. You will never be a woman."

That was funny! And well deserved.

What gets to me is that these trolls, blackpillers, or whatever they are, can do what the rest of us did. Go out and confirm what is posted here about Trump. It's not hard to find the evidence. Google CISA. Google Trump's EOs in 2018. Google the server raids. Once you see that this evidence backs up what has been stated about Trump's sting, the conclusion is obvious. Yet, they prefer to stay in their comfortable "show me", world and declare that if it isn't shown to them, then eff Trump. I honestly don't know how VD puts up with these losers. But, it sure makes for some good humor when he lets them have their just deserts.

Blogger xevious2030 November 29, 2020 11:40 AM  

“is unforgivable [...] why the mastermind was playing golf”

If you have a solid plan, do you run around like a chicken with it’s head cut off? Roll around on the floor like a mesmerized little girl? Vox is right, again.

Trump is waiting for reality to catch up with his intentions. How many Supreme Court justices has he swapped out, you fucking moron. As if he just lucked into that, at this time, finishing just before this case. Just because you’re stupid does not mean Trump is. Stop projecting.

Blogger Avalanche November 29, 2020 12:01 PM  

@22 "Letting that happen with the election is unforgivable."

Unless Trump's plan was to avoid trying to shut down the Dems with RICO suits -- and had instead set up to allow them to COMMIT the crime and be recorded doing so, so they go to jail, GITMO, the hangman, for what they did, not what they hinted at doing!

Treason! Insurrection! The murder of Seth Rich and others!

WAY better than white-collar crimes and six months in a Club Fed, no?

Blogger Anonymous White Male November 29, 2020 12:18 PM  

crescent wrench wrote:
The question is whether the 9 idiots in black robes can comprehend the importance of what they're adjudicating and twist whatever needs to be twisted to arrive at the ruling to re-vote.


I don't know how anyone could think that the "9 idiots in black robes" CAN'T comprehend the importance of what they're adjudicating. Even the affirmative action judges on the SCOTUS have been given their marching orders. And while they slept through constitutional law courses in their affirmative action Ivy League schools, they know enough to do as they are told. The question really is: What do the 9 black robed idiots fear most? Trump and the American peasants, or Satan and his offspring.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd November 29, 2020 12:28 PM  

JWM in SD wrote:Look Vox, the deadline is the 14th. If something is going to happen it has to before that or it ain't happening.
Why would you imagine that you will see it happen? Trump has consistently kept the important stuff on the down-low.

Blogger KPKinSunnyPhiladelphia November 29, 2020 12:43 PM  

Very good legal analysis. Thanks for that.

I'm working from memory here, but one of the provisions of the mail in ballot "law" passed by the legislature was that it "provided" a deadline to 180 days to contest it. That faux deadline has long passed. As such, the other side can marshal the laches argument, and then request the estoppel.

However, the law was clearly violated the state constitution as it did not seek and acquire the requisite constitutional amendment to change the state election laws.

Argument for voiding the mail in ballots: clearly a STATE unconstitutional law, so mail-in/absentee votes that used the provisions of the law are thus invalid and should be thrown out. And don't give us the laches argument, because had we contested it, we wouldn't have had standing.

Argument for NOT voiding the mail-in ballots: the US constitution says that the state legislatures--which passed this law--has sole responsibility for election rules,and the US constitution trumps the State Constitution, even thought the law itself violated the State constitution. On top of that we have laches.

It's hard to make predictions about the future, but when this goes to the Supremes, here is the lineup.

The libs, plus Roberts will be squishy. Thomas and Alito will vote to toss the ballots. The other three? Hard to know.

But it may turn on whether Amy Coney Barrett has a pair.

Blogger AJ November 29, 2020 12:51 PM  

I don’t know why people freak out that there are deadlines looming - these are dates affixed in the ether for lawful proceedings not for lawfare. The weakness of those who hew to “traditions” is this that when circumstances of utter fuckery are alleged and can be reasonably believed to have been committed is to then throw in the burden of deadlines.

So how do you proceed - how to cut the knot?

If you want to save the republic and its traditions - then you’re constrained to operate within it.
But if you want to save the revolution - and the American revolution is significantly more about a preservation of liberty and natural law than any utopia, it is perhaps necessary to convene again not to certify electors but elect a new republic which would be just the old republic minus the dregs of adaptations since.

Blogger Timmy3 November 29, 2020 12:51 PM  

“ The U.S. Supreme Court could revive the injunction”

Certainly, however, the clock is ticking. I’m thinking that for the Supreme Court to issue rulings at this late game, they won’t have another chance to make it right. It has to count and complete the controversy. PA completely ignored the previous ruling to sequester the votes. Just throw out all illegal, unconstitutional, and fraudulent votes as a matter of law. Keep the legal votes. Or throw it to the legislature. Very few choices here.

Blogger Primus Pilus November 29, 2020 12:52 PM  

Brutus wrote:The Biden team knew what to do and when to do it to secure victory. The Right had better wake up and see what is in front of them. Ridiculous, too many of you. As stupid as David Irving with this legal and court strategy. The street, on election night, was where the battle should have been fought. The only 4 am bundles of ballots to make it to election precincts should have been for Trump.

Get serious or stay used to journalist crowing about "denying a second term," and Jewish lesbians laying the law down to you.


The fraud was telegraphed from orbit. 2018 was clearly a trial run for 2020, and they only ramped up their intent to steal as the election got closer, with preemptive declarations from PA and other state officials, the censorship, "news" organizations outright saying "It will only look like Trump will have won late election night, but then Biden will overcome him!", etc.

If Trump didn't prevent the fraud from occurring, which he obviously didn't, then there's only two explanations:

1) He wanted the enemy to overreach and expose itself, and had what he felt was a foolproof plan in place to counterattack.

2) He's the dumbest, most inept politician of the modern era.

I still have no reason to assume (1) isn't the case. If I saw this coming well in advance, as Mr. Anonymous Nobody with no political influence whatsoever, then it's difficult to believe Trump and his team not only didn't see it coming, but had no plan to counter it even with all the resources of the Executive Branch at their disposal.

Is it possible (2) is the case? Well, sure. I'm not omniscient, and Trump is still human, and thus fallible. If you're right about (2) being the case, we'll find out for sure in the next couple weeks, and nothing either of us talks about on the internet will change what the truth actually is behind the scenes, but if, and until, (2) proves to be true, blackpilling is really histrionic and gay.

Blogger Werekoala November 29, 2020 1:25 PM  

No reason for panic or blackpilling. Do you see ANY signs of panic, confusion, or disorganization from anyone on Team Trump, much less the GE? They're going through The Process so that when Trump wins, the leftists won't be able to backtrack anywhere because all of that territory will already have been fought over and conquered. Leftists are being completely enveloped and pushed into a smaller and smaller pocket until there's literally nowhere else for them to go. Ignore the nervous nellies, look to the officers and generals leading this campaign. They're either fools, actors - or confident leaders who know all of the evidence and all of the plans. I'm going with the third option.

Blogger David November 29, 2020 2:01 PM  

Werekoala wrote:They're going through The Process so that when Trump wins, the leftists won't be able to backtrack anywhere because all of that territory will already have been fought over and conquered.

This is pretty much it. While it seems like Team Trump are the ones that are having to resort to narrower and narrower measures, it's actually the reverse. They have an argument ready to go, but they first need to jump through the "proper" hoops so that when the particular argument is reached, nobody can say they didn't do The Thing. You know the thing, everybody knows the thing. It's a multi-front battle requiring patriots from all over the nation doing the right things, but it's becoming clearer and clearer that either they've been working on this exact plan since 2014-ish, or else we're just not seeing things with the correct worldview. And considering most people here view the world through a scriptural lens, I'm going all in on the fact we here have been right all along.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch November 29, 2020 6:31 PM  

If things end up to where absolutely nothing is legitimate anymore, none of the three branches of government, law and order, basic morality—then I would pretty much say the conditions are ripe for…

I mean, nations have been destroyed for far less. I truly hope that the right in this country will not be a bunch of pussies, realize that they are about to be cannibalized, and defend themselves against annihilation. Again, if everything is illegitimate, then there is no country anymore.

Blogger Pathfinderlight November 29, 2020 7:35 PM  

Trump and the American nation HAVE to go through the courts to get their treason on record. The more nonsensical the logic they use, the better for us to prove their crimes.

Courts normally move at a snail's pace, so getting them to act on anything is like pulling teeth.

Forcing them to burn more assets by mistakenly trying to push a losing fight is ideal. Sure, it might LOOK like the elites have the upper hand now, and they might. But this is a fight we could never have avoided.

The enemy culture recognizes only temporary truces and crushing us. Fight, and you may die. Surrender, and you or your children will die.

Blogger BILLY DIRT December 05, 2020 5:37 AM  

Explanation (3) He wanted to lose.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts