Vox Popoli: 1st marker verified

Eduardo December 11, 2020 9:37 PM: This is a Nintendo Power game...
islanti December 11, 2020 9:40 PM: Gravy.
Taylor? December 11, 2020 9:41 PM: Deus vult
LeMage December 11, 2020 9:42 PM: Of course, you know, this means war.
Cedric December 11, 2020 9:43 PM: I was watching one of the recent darkstreams.

If control of the media for 5GW is the top down version analogous to 3GW, is the insurrection from Q a 6GW response analogous to 4GW?
Beto December 11, 2020 9:46 PM: We are numerologists now?
Ahnaf Ibn Qais December 11, 2020 9:47 PM: The Judiciary has failed the Republic.
The Republic is Dead.
Long Live the Empire!
Unknown December 11, 2020 9:51 PM: Wouldn't 11.3 be November 3rd (the election)?
Richard Rahl December 11, 2020 9:53 PM: We've been in a cold war for at least 4 years.
Alexei December 11, 2020 9:55 PM: I'm sorry. I gotta raise the BS flag on this one. That's just way, way too far into entrail-reading for me to buy it.

Q is real, but many Q interpretatioms are simply shyte. This one smells rank.
Newscaper312 December 11, 2020 10:14 PM: So Q is supposed to be actually clairvoyant?
11/3 would seem more obviously Election Day.
Beloved December 11, 2020 10:17 PM: Psalms 9:17

The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.
Fozzy Bear December 11, 2020 10:24 PM: “If only the Supreme Court had followed reason, evidence, and the law...” will be their epitaph.
Arthur Isaac December 11, 2020 10:24 PM: 11.3? Election day?
The Lab Manager December 11, 2020 10:25 PM: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

Article III
Primary tabs
Section 1.
The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.

Section 2.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed.

Section 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
glueballs December 11, 2020 10:29 PM: Proving fraud was the difficult burden. The Texas-multistate cert? Comparatively easy. I only see an armed way forward now, which is the opposite of my prior belief yesterday. Let’s rip, got something better to do? Yea, you and “everybody else.” So live with the outcome. Or hide. Them’s your applies unless I am mistaken, pray I am.
Kraemer December 11, 2020 10:30 PM: Grab a controller or some popcorn
nswhorse December 11, 2020 10:32 PM: I'm enjoying this movie.
xevious2030 December 11, 2020 10:36 PM: “They never thought they were going to lose control of the Presidency (not just D's) and thought they had control since making past mistakes”

They had it all, and then low trust did what low trust does, tries to screw over. They violated protocols. They thought to out-clever the innocent-intelligent.
Charmaine December 11, 2020 10:39 PM: Gravy indeed.
Br1cht December 11, 2020 10:40 PM: Is it worth mentioning that the GE´s Judges voted against him and this is indeed part of the plan? That should be a good sign because any other explanation would suggest that Trunq is a horrible judge of character and/or gullible, that is not my understading on who he is.

Just my supposition of course.
Jonesey December 11, 2020 10:41 PM: Almost Rubicon Time, No?
D. December 11, 2020 10:41 PM: water hazard signs:

email from Trump at: Fri, Dec 11 at 9:43 PM

,

This may be the most important email I ever send you.

I want to provide an update on our ongoing efforts to expose the tremendous voting irregularities that took place during the ridiculously long November 3rd Election.

As President, I have no higher duty than to defend the laws of the Constitution of the United States. That is why I am determined to protect our Election system - which is under attack - but I cannot do it alone. I need YOUR HELP.

n the days and weeks after the Election, we witnessed an orchestrated effort by the Left to name Joe Biden as the winner - while many key states were still counting votes. It was madness.

Bottom line, we are going to defend the honesty of the vote, ensuring every LEGAL ballot is COUNTED, and that NO ILLEGAL ballot is counted.

This is about more than just honoring the votes of 74 MILLION Americans who voted for me. It’s about ensuring that Americans can have faith in this Election, >and in all future Elections<.

Q++?
Jeroth December 11, 2020 10:42 PM: How would they know exact dates so far ahead of time?
Nostromo December 11, 2020 10:45 PM: I admit I was Pozed when I heard the denial, but now that I've calmed down I recalled a fee things. Sydney has claimed they have the servers from Germany. They have Haspell no doubt. Unless Sydney was gaslighting. Does anyone believe that? There is still a big reveal coming.

Also, Malig-Nancy when informed of Swallowell has been compromised by the Chi-coms, who did she go after saying they were the threat? Qanon. After cooling off, my gut feeling is Trump is 80-90 % going to be President next year.

And if not, I am still optimistic, because we are in the hands of the lord. When Trump crosses the Rubicon, and they left him no choice, it will be with the backing of the military, and an 80 million man militia. WWG1WGA!!!
CF Neal December 11, 2020 10:47 PM: Only the States, United, by their respective legislatures substituting electors for Trump/Pence, can save America; or, rather, ameliorate the inevitable coming PAIN.

https://twitter.com/Fneal1231/status/1337599002095673345

God save the Republic!
Charles Martel December 11, 2020 10:47 PM: Trump will only cross the Rubicon when all other options have been explored. I do not believe he will shrink away from doing his duty.
D. December 11, 2020 10:49 PM: I'll also note that John Burk's 1st song tonight on kqac was Joplin's "The Entertainer" aka the the music from the movie The Sting. Odd choice of intro.
Unknown December 11, 2020 10:58 PM: Maybe I need more background and context but that wasn't very impressive.

Vox did a video discussing 5GW yesterday. He also spoke about the Book Unrestricted Warfare, which sits on my shelf. I would suggest the book Brave New War by John Robb.
Hammer December 11, 2020 11:07 PM: Even though SCOTUS rejected this case, I think things can still be settled there. From what I've learned with people like VD, the authors he recommends on matters of war and also other intellectuals that deal with cultural warfare, if you show weakness you're probably going to lose even if you're absolutely correct. The problem with the Texas case was that, instead of calling out the massive and observable fraud, reduced everything down to a matter of constitutionality. For us this seems reasonable, but for the establishment - and for SCOTUS - it screams "I'm scared of calling out the fraud and maybe we can resolve everything without having to deal with it"; and we all know that these people from the establishment can only see weakness or strength, they never see right or wrong, good and bad.

I think Giuliani's case is a lot stronger in terms of optics. But VD is right in that nothing shows strength more than the final solution in the hands of Trump.
JD Curtis December 11, 2020 11:09 PM: OK Qanon wonks..
I see the 11. I see the 3.
What is the significance of the circled 'is denied'??
Bobo #117 December 11, 2020 11:11 PM: Robb is smart.

Almost as smart as he thinks he is...
ar10308 December 11, 2020 11:19 PM: So, we're supposed to believe that Q knew in 2017 the date in December 2020 on which the SCOTUS would refuse to hear a lawsuit from Texas, thereby clearing the way to invoke the Insurrection Act?
That's a bit of a bridge too far, especially when 11.3 could mean anything.
Ominous Cowherd December 11, 2020 11:22 PM: On 21 January, the president of the senate is going to count the electoral votes, but only the ones he wants to count. If Trump has put the fear of God in that worthless cuck, he'll do the right thing.
Greg December 11, 2020 11:29 PM: You might want to duck.
One thing I've learned about Trump, is that he speaks the truth, not always by being precise, but in essence. It drives the left wild, because they take him literally, but not seriously. His supporters take him seriously, but not literally.
Maybe that's a clue to the right spirit in which to take A and Q decodes?
For what it's worth, I'm scratching my head at this post too.
Greg December 11, 2020 11:37 PM: Military is also circled.
Leo Littlebook ID:16216229492837658552 December 11, 2020 11:38 PM: VD's interpretation is wrong. The drop was about the Saudi purge, as Q explained on November 4.
Unknown December 11, 2020 11:41 PM: Project Looking Glass is one theory
MLGunner December 11, 2020 11:46 PM: Just wondering, the three justices that Trump seated ruled against him, and yet Alito and Thomas objected (I am sure Scalia would have also, had he been alive). I know Roberts would have cucked anyways, but Gorsuch and Kavanaugh generally side with Alito and Thomas.
Do you think Trump might have asked them to "take a dive" in this case?
Article III section 3 might be a better reason to claim Texas doesn't have standing.
Which would take precedence? Civil claim between states, or a capital criminal case?
MATT December 11, 2020 11:48 PM: Vox lets get serious now: what kind of puppies are they?
Skillet December 11, 2020 11:58 PM: Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!
Bill Henry December 12, 2020 12:02 AM: Just putting this out there.. GE realigned succession in the DoD. Norquist is now next in line for the SOD. Norquist has been very busy the last 24 months. Spearheading committees meeting with FCC.. The Navy's advanced weapons systems.. and maybe most importantly he is ramrodding Hypersonic weapons and AI DoD integration.. which now come under the aegis of Space Force.. He appears to be the Admins inside man for money, Navy advanced weapons systems and he has been busy wrestling advance systems away from other branches of the Military delivering them to Space Force.. also.. he headed a committee investigating the Air Forces UFO and sundry information systerms/programs.. Not sure if this is relevant to what may be coming... could mean nothing.. might mean GE plans on using Space Force to control COMSAT in conjunction with advanced Naval Assets..
Interesting Times
Joe December 12, 2020 12:08 AM: "We are numerologists now?"

The prometheans are.
Pathfinderlight December 12, 2020 12:09 AM: No American uses . to delineate dates or phone numbers. That's a foreigner thing. We use - or / for dates and - for phone numbers.

That post looks like a European Q or Anon who's aware of American date order but not delineation...or he could be an American telling us this is NOT referring to a date.
Cedric December 12, 2020 12:12 AM: The President says, 'The Supreme Court really let us down. No Wisdom, No Courage!'

Sounds like the Supreme Court isn't all that important.
Robert Pinkerton December 12, 2020 12:19 AM: I have speculated here that Mr. Trump is too much of an institutionalist to pull a tanks-in-the-streets coup d'etat unless and only unless he sees all institutional remedies exhausted. Is this that point?
Charmaine December 12, 2020 12:23 AM: I think it signals military action when all other venues are denied.
map December 12, 2020 12:25 AM: JD Curtis wrote:OK Qanon wonks..

I see the 11. I see the 3.

What is the significance of the circled 'is denied'??

"Is denied" is highlighted in yellow. There are three elements highlighted in yellow, indicating that they go together:

Only Way
Is Denied
Article III

"Only way" references military, "is denied" is the trigger and "Article III" is element alluded to.

Three elements are circled in green:

11.3
11
III

"11.3" refers to, separately, December 11, and "III," not the election of 11.3.

Together, SCOTUS denial of case means that Trump needs to focus on Article III, Section 3 of the constitution.

SCOTUS wants to hear a Treason case regarding the election.
map December 12, 2020 12:25 AM: Of course, I don't understand the reasoning of denying standing under Article III on its own.
Johnny December 12, 2020 12:42 AM: >>The problem with the Texas case was that, instead of calling out the massive and observable fraud, reduced everything down to a matter of constitutionality.

I think what is going on is that it is lawyers talking to lawyers and they wanted it make it as easy as possible for the court to accept the case. Because the Supremes don't have much in the way of investigative staff, they prefer to deal with matters of law rather than fact, what you call constitutionality. Plus by not dealing with the details, they can push that hot potato down onto the states. Not forcing them to rule on details would make it all easier.

I am put off that they didn't take the case, and guessing they are not going to take any case. They are the only venue for settling legal matters between states and it seemed to me like a clean way of dealing with the problem without the court getting overly involved in detail that would be better left local.
OMGDwayne December 12, 2020 12:42 AM: Well, here it comes. We've been building toward this since FDR let in the (((dipshits))). It's gonna be epic. I just wish I was younger. It will start somewhere and spread to Europe, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Whites cannot retreat a step further. If it's not under Trump, it will be someone else.
Ace December 12, 2020 1:08 AM: PSSSSST... It’s all bullshit
Daniel December 12, 2020 1:19 AM: This is not rocket science. Q is privy to a calendar AND those with an interest in verifying Q are aware of past drops.

For once, the Hard Right is playing the game both ways. Heads we win, tails they hang.
xevious2030 December 12, 2020 1:31 AM: “is the insurrection from Q a 6GW response”

No, Q is 5gw. The insurrection is not the state losing control, as the state in this case has not been the sole actor. 4gw is a thing, but the actions of the globohomo deep state was a facadal mimicry of the notion. A lot of the appeared 4gw was 5gw, and still continues to be.

Deep state agency funds Soros, goes through NGO, comes back as AntiFa or whatever. It’s all the state there.
Arthur Isaac December 12, 2020 1:54 AM: If there was a gunfight over the Scytel server that resulted in dead operators trying to secure election hardware per the EO of 9/12/20. The bodies and the evidence secured are all it will take to secure the loyalty and righteous wrath of the door kickers in the U.S. armed forces. This doesn't have to go through media channels, courts or legislative bodies. They can identify that treasonous behavior took place and will be ready and willing to deal with it using extreme (and fully warranted) prejudice.

Trump would have his loyal Rubicon army already.
wEz December 12, 2020 1:58 AM: Proving fraud would have been the easy part. The impossible part was getting there when progressive or spineless judges wouldn't put truth, honesty, and transparency over partisan politics and desiree outcomes.
Canadian Warlord December 12, 2020 2:13 AM: Skillet
>>>"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?!"
_______________
Don't stop him, he's rolling.

As for the "numerology debate," this has been an ongoing debate for a long time in patriot circles. The basic fact is, it's not useful tactically because us plebes don't know which numbers/dates are important until after the fact. Hilarious as it all is.

If Q and the general consensus proves me wrong, I'll be happy about it.
jt December 12, 2020 2:23 AM: A friend introduced you to me tonight. This is from Q? What are the other markers if there are any?
map December 12, 2020 2:47 AM: I mean, was the whole Texas built up on the supposed ease the lawyers made for the Court to hear the case? Wasn't it built around an equal protection issue and not on the merits of Giuliani's or Powell's evidence?
map December 12, 2020 3:10 AM: I was over at citizens free press reading the comments, and this guy wrote the following:

anything_similar

I FEEL THE ABSOLUTE NEED TO POST THIS …because there is alot of confusion going on about AG TX case against the 4 states and what “standing” means. What it actually means IN THIS CASE.
The supreme court DOES STATE that TX has NO STANDING…. IN fact, SCOTUS used a clear interpretation of the constitution regarding this matter.
article III..(I recommend reading it regarding standing requirements and thresholds)..
In a nutshell, the majority (presumably 7-2) opined TX having not demonstrated “a judicially cognizable interest”….therefore has no standing BEFORE SCOTUS! (keep this in memory)
Now, TWO of those that opinioned otherwise, USED CASE LAW, SCOTUS RULING to differ on this plainly incorrect basis to reject. Thomas and Alito referred to this:
In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction. See Arizona v. California, 589 U. S. ___ (Feb. 24, 2020) (Thomas, J., dissenting). I would therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue.
the last part…”but would not grant other relief”…has been open to loads of speculation about its meaning…read it simply. These two judges on the high court have “jurisdiction” in at least on or more of the states involved in the suit. Therefore they have a DUTY to allow the filing and see the case. It just that simple. And it’s the constitutionally recognized standard with many examples to reflect it.
the real reason why these two would state the “but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue” is difficult to explain given there is such a brief statement. But remember, SHOULD A FUTURE case even close to this case be brought before the high court, it would be very stupid to have made a presumptive opinion ON THIS CASE either way. Think of it this way: “in ITS PRESENT FORM, we would not grant relief….”…
understand now?
Now how does this work as a positive…?
1. the case rejected by scotus now sets the range shot for state conservative members to focus on. STANDING IS NOW VERY CLEAR. Alito and Thomas have all but given them the case law to propel and secure a hearing before the high court.
2. other states can follow with a cut and paste.
MUCH SHIT has been echoed around here and other places about the defeat of AG Paxtons efforts…fruitless…stupid
you folks need to WAKE UP..this is war…you don’t just walk into MORDOR.
think!!!
PRAY!
ACT!
Leo Littlebook ID:16216229492837658552 December 12, 2020 3:19 AM: Re Map@48: Weak speculation. If Q had said 12-11 3.3, that would be plausible. Map is reaching because he missed the obvious answer: the Saudi purge. His solution looks good only in the false dilemma of comparing it to the 11-3 election.

Re Daniel@53: Maybe this is a refrain of the common Q date 11.3. Maybe. Or maybe the Supremes were on a tight schedule and it's coincidence. It doesn't look likely that the Supremes are down with Q, given their rejection of Trump's "most important case".

Far more likely this is yet another in a long line of Republicuck betrayals Team Trump is prepared for but hoped against, because they're Boomers who consistently underestimate the power of the ethnic, religious, and social cyclic forces arrayed against them. In fact it must be a betrayal, because no ally of Trump makes him looked defeated and weak.

The Supreme Court hasn't repented of industrial infanticide. Why did the MAGAts currently blackpilling set their hopes on the council of Moloch? It is the court of final appeal for peeling skin off of babies and mandatory immersive miscegenation for minors. We should just be thankful they didn't gangbang Ginsberg atop the bench to dedicate the empire to Satan — that we know of. The Republicucks would be happy to see the real Right leave the party in disgust so that they can resume running the country with Democrats sans interference. If Soros isn't paying figures such as Z-man to tout abandonment of the Republican party, he's missing a bargain.
map December 12, 2020 3:25 AM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHe1dpWOgtg&feature=emb_logo

This is a youtube video on a rundown of the effect of Trump's Executive Order 13848 from 2018 and its effect on the election.
Trader369 December 12, 2020 3:25 AM: So basically the SCOTUS says that what's it to you whether other states commit election fraud or carry out fair elections. You are not harmed so for some reason we don't want to look at the evidence. The "conservative" SCOTUS, that promptly fails to conserve the legitimacy of the elections.
Claudio December 12, 2020 3:45 AM: Qanon is this generation’s John Titor. We’re all going to feel like idiots when this all suddenly goes away. Sadly, I will add.
Gregory the Tall December 12, 2020 4:16 AM: Did Trump intend to stay president with a minority in the house and a shaky majority in the senate after SCOTUS might have said it will not deal with the question of election fraud (which then would have remained unproven), but decides that 62 electors can be chosen by the (equally shaky) majority in four state legislatures?
I think not.
Crunchy Cachalot December 12, 2020 5:01 AM: the three justices that Trump seated ruled against him

Ingratitude and disloyalty are like champagne and caviar to Swamp critters.
Parallax December 12, 2020 5:04 AM: Q is spelled Nostradamus.
rumpole5 December 12, 2020 6:16 AM: Exactly. We haven't had rule by the people for some time. What is going on is a shadow civil war amongst the real governing authorities in the "Yes Minister" bureaucracy.
JWM in SD December 12, 2020 6:54 AM: I'm hearing something similar to this as well from a different forum I'm on.
xevious2030 December 12, 2020 8:24 AM: “don't understand the reasoning of denying standing under Article III on its own”
It was filed under the Article III idea of original jurisdiction. SCOTUS indicated Texas did not have standing, and so declined to hear the case. There would first have to be standing for the equal protection issue to be able to be heard. Alito and a Thomas indicated the case should have been heard regardless of the content. Seven disagreed.

On Q.
“shall hold their offices during good behaviour” - Article III
Filing of the brief “is denied,” demonstrating that the military is “the only way”
“Treason against the United States […] unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act” - Article III
There are three Article III focuses. The States filing under Article III. SCOTUS abdicating their responsibility under Article III, by denying it. Treason and removal. Removal, on SCOTUS, and treason as a more general and widespread condition.

A SCOTUS win would have placed this in a Democrat legislature, with a Biden (Harris) outcome. Judicial and Legislature, two branches, failing, leaving it up to the Executive alone to maintain the intent of the Founding Fathers. This being the only way.
Sam Gem December 12, 2020 9:07 AM: Future proves past.
Q
xevious2030 December 12, 2020 9:17 AM: At any rate, 11.3 being related to the election, not to the circles and scribbles, would be the more probable. Though the scribbles are interesting.
Ominous Cowherd December 12, 2020 9:40 AM: xevious2030 wrote:A SCOTUS win would have placed this in a Democrat legislature, with a Biden (Harris) outcome.
Remember, every actor in this is either a traitor or a coward selected by traitors.

The most likely thing the supremes could have done was to tell the four state legislatures to choose and send electors. The most likely thing the legislatures could have done was cuck and go with the fraud. That means four fraudulently elected slates of Biden electors.

Alito and Thomas might, maybe, not fit the ``coward selected by traitors'' description.

xevious2030 wrote:There are three Article III focuses. The States filing under Article III. SCOTUS abdicating their responsibility under Article III, by denying it. Treason and removal ...
Removing at least seven of the supremes from office for nonfeasance certainly seems a reasonable, limited response to this ruling.
Beloved December 12, 2020 9:53 AM: The Prometheans copy the Lord.

Proverbs 16:33

Nothing in this world is random. Everything you think is random is decided by an actively interventionist deity known as Jesus Christ. The Bible is full of numerology. God speaks to his people through numbers: 666 for example.
tuberman December 12, 2020 10:00 AM: >> VD's interpretation is wrong. The drop was about the Saudi purge, as Q explained on November 4.

No, you're off base rather than wrong, as post 26 was about SA purge, but was also about the future in the USA. For some context, here is post 22, made less then an hour earlier on the same day as post 26, or November 1, 2017:

"Who controls the NG?
Why was the NG recently activated in select cities within the US?
Can the NG work in coordination w/ the marines?
Do conditions need to be satisfied to authorize?
What former President used the military to save the republic and what occurred exactly?
Biggest drop to ever be provided on Pol. Study and prepare. The masses tend to panic in such situations. No war. No civil unrest. Clean and swift."

This was obviously about control by POTUS of troops in the USA, and acting in the USA. I believe the 'conditions' have all been met.
Elder Son December 12, 2020 10:50 AM: An honest 11-3 was denied. Sec. III and the military is the only way.

Sec. 1 and 2 is denied, which leaves you with Sec. III. Because this is where treason, insurrection, and rebellion belongs.

The insurrection Act gives Trump, the President of the United States, the power to deploy U.S. military and federalized National Guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection and rebellion.

SCOTUS could very will be saying that this is beyond a matter of "law", the states lack of standing could refer to treason, insurrection, and rebellion.

When the treason, insurrection, and rebellion is exposed on behalf of, and through foreign powers (Globalists - Aid and Comfort - Levying War - Against our Constitution - Sovereignty), the evidence will be devastating.
History Diver December 12, 2020 11:00 AM: Is it worth mentioning that the GE´s Judges voted against him and this is indeed part of the plan?

Trump's power is not so much to be a judge of character as a catalyst. No enemy asset can remain dormant when Trump makes a stand. He is the lifter of the veil. The revealer of true colours. If the SCOTUS had not been put to the test in this manner nobody would have known how utterly corrupt and useless they are. Remember, better the devil you know than the devil you don't know.
xevious2030 December 12, 2020 11:17 AM: “Removing at least seven of the supremes from office”

A number of them vacationing in Gitmo would be nice.
xevious2030 December 12, 2020 11:37 AM: Texas had standing. The Constitution is a compact, a contractual agreement. The spoils of the presidential election is the outcome, shared by all. How a legislature chooses to pick electors is an internal matter, but that it must be set by the legislature, is not.

A State that certifies and selects electors outside of the legislatively established process, places the state in violation of the contract. It changes in the shared spoils. That is standing. Those are damages. This is before the mountain of other things. All the States have standing. Each State can file, including the defendant State.
Leo Littlebook ID:16216229492837658552 December 12, 2020 12:06 PM: Re Tuberman@75: No, my rebuttal was correct, and you are reading imprecisely. The Supreme Court may yet rule for Trump, and Military Intelligence will still be the only way, because the Supreme Court does not enforce. That would take guts, whereas the Boomers in black dresses have only flabby butts.
Azure Amaranthine December 12, 2020 12:22 PM: "Exactly. We haven't had rule by the people for some time. What is going on is a shadow civil war amongst the real governing authorities"

That's always how it works when Italians are involved.

Rod Walker	Nick Cole
Martin van Creveld	Jonathan Moeller
John C. Wright	Rolf Nelson
Mike Cernovich	David the Good
David VanDyke	B.V. Larson
Jerry Pournelle	Cheah Kai Wai
Peter Grant	Sarah Salviander
Ivan Throne	Steve Keen
Tara McCarthy	LawDog
C.R. Hallpike	Jon Del Arroz

NON-FICTION DOWNLOADS

DOGGEREL

BOOK LIST 2020

POLITICAL THEORY

ATHEIST DEMOTIVATORS

Vox Popoli

CONTACT

VOXOLOGY

Voxiversity

CRYPTOFASHION

CASTALIA BOOKLISTS

Topics

Interviews

Interviews of Me

SITES OF INTEREST

Voxonomica

Friday, December 11, 2020

1st marker verified

81 Comments:

Post a Comment

DAY TRIPS

CULTURE WAR RESOURCES

BOOK OF THE MONTH

CASTALIA AUTHORS