By Rich Kozlovich
For SCOTUS to decide Texas, and correspondingly all the states that signed on to Texas' lawsuit has "no standing" boggles the mind. If the states had no standing in this, who could have standing? And clearly in the weak minds of these jurists: No one! They're now saying we will now legally sanctify that which is illegal, criminal and treasonous.
Now isn't that a happy thought! So, what now?
First, before I get into alternatives, let’s do a little evaluation of this strange ruling by SCOTUS from one of my correspondents from one of my networks. We've been exchanging doom and gloom thoughts, but he came on saying:
Not so fast...
The corrupt electoral mechanism has been exposed for all to see. Even though they got away with it, it doesn't matter: It's on the radar screen of all patriots now. The Dems' biggest mistake was pulling out all the stops, and exposing the soft underbelly, just because of their hatred for Trump. That is, they have shot their wad, and are all out of plays.
Biden/Harris will be a joke, and in time, even the lamestream media will be forced to cover some of it. While Harris may have the cover of a "woman of color," Biden is nothing more than an old, stupid, corrupt white guy. Those behind the scenes are already overplaying their hand, with their ridiculous and unconfirmable cabinet choices. You can also bet that Harris' entire sordid history--and this goes well beyond a veritable career of horizontal favors--will get plenty of coverage in the tabloid media and scores of websites...............the liberal justices would not hear it for ideological reasons, and the conservatives ones would not hear it, either...for ideological reasons. You see, they are "strict constructionists.".........they are so "strict" that as the entire county is being stolen before their very eyes, they must maintain their ivory tower outlook, lest they dirty their robes. That, and no one wanting to be "the guy" that overturns this corrupt election.
Alas, the conservative justices were given a choice between love (of their country) and fear. And they chose fear. "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love." Or, to put it another way, Evil has no power, unless you grant it. It's times like this that make me glad that there are currently 400 million guns in the US. The good news is that rebellion (peaceful or otherwise) is in the air--and you can see it in how people are responding to the absurd COVID lockdowns.
Dear friends: They jumped the shark, and the response will not be silent.
At this point we are already seeing people in the streets with massive demonstrations, and this is the first day after the ruling. Was this was largely spontaneous, or was it organized by some hidden group with large finances providing transportation and money, as it was with BLM and Antifa, and that ilk?
Furthermore, they're not burning down buildings, not attacking anyone, no demonstration of violence or intimidation, just Americans who are outraged at this stolen election and the corruption in the nation's institutions that are allowing it.
The nation has now awakened to the leftist corruption that’s been brewing forever. A corruption that was obvious to those who pay attention to what’s going on for years. Corruption so many tried to alert everyone to it, to no avail. Why? We were all conspiracy theorists.
However, the corruption was so obvious it should have been obvious to so-called conservatives in leadership roles in commerce, in politics, in the media, unions, trade associations, and most importantly, the leadership in the Republican party. Few of which did anything to prevent this mess. I wonder how many history books they've read?
Let's put this in perspective. If a bug man could see this unfolding and predict this: How could they not have seen this? How could they not have predicted this? And finally, how could they have not realized this was in serious need of being fixed before it happened?
So, what now? There's a lot of options being thrown around, so let's take a look at them.
According to James Arlandson, We Don't Need SCOTUS to Win saying the SCOTUS ruling wasn't cowardice, it was an unwillingness to grab power from the legislatures. Really? He's kidding...right? Since when has SCOTUS been reluctant to override and capture for itself the authority given to the state legislatures by the Constitution? That's a new one for me in my lifetime!
However, I think his research on this issue provides extremely useful information noting:
The first federal law for our purposes, titled "Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors," says:
If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.
So this provision, if I understand it correctly, says that states may appoint electors after a controversy ("controversy or contest"). Now, what happens when fraud and illegalities are so egregious that they help one candidate exclusively and harm only one candidate in such a way that it is unclear which electors shall be appointed? That definitely qualifies to become a "controversy or contest." The provision opens the door to each state legislature having the right to determine how the state can appoint electors ("appointment of electors" and "ascertainment of electors"). (This is already clear in the Twelfth Amendment, but here this provision gives more clarity after a controversy.) Bottom line: The electors for Biden, the "fake winner," can be set aside if that is what each individual state law allows...................
The author goes on to say:
However, what about the "six days" in the election law provision? The next federal law, in a section titled "failure to make a choice before prescribed day," says:
Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct.
The states can determine when they appoint the electors "on a subsequent day" (not the next day). The phrase "In such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct" gives the states much leeway to select the right electors, which agrees with the Electors Clause, cited above. And if the controversy in selecting electors, caused by fraud and illegalities, persists past Dec. 14, then the states can ignore the date and follow their need to further investigate fraud and illegalities.
The whole thing can work out like this, apart from the Texas lawsuit before SCOTUS.
The undisputed states vote electorally on Dec. 14, and neither Biden nor Trump reaches 270, so neither one is the winner. The five GOP state legislatures (Arizona, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) of the six disputed states (minus Nevada) say they need to postpone their electoral votes because they are investigating fraud and illegalities. The legislatures perform due diligence (they have been holding hearings to collect the evidence) and conclude that fraud and illegalities unilaterally hurt Trump and helped only Biden. Assuming that the Democrat Legislature in Nevada says everything was legitimate, each disputed GOP state may reach this conclusion on any day after Dec. 14 — say, on Dec. 27 or even Jan. 15. Then they appoint electors who vote for the rightful winner: Trump (provided the GOP-selected electors do not suffer from TDS). These votes are added in to the votes cast on Dec. 14. Trump goes past 270 electoral votes. He wins!
However, what happens if the disputed states cannot select the electors, and neither Trump or Biden reaches 270? Then it goes to the House of Representatives, and each state has one vote, and this one vote is determined by the political makeup of the state legislatures. The GOP controls 29 state legislatures, and the Democrats have 19 (two are split). Trump wins again..............
First, we can keep up the pressure on the legislators of those five GOP states to select electors who will vote for the rightful winner, who is obviously Trump. Some of the members in these legislatures may suffer from TDS, so the message must be sent that they have to set aside their irrational opposition and do the right thing.
Second, Sidney Powell's legal team can continue with their lawsuits, so they can expose and uproot Dominion Voting Systems. Now the goal will not be to overturn elections, but to get rid of the flawed, rigged system. This goal is m uch more realistic and easier to accomplish. The court cases will take a long time. But that's okay, because they keep in the public view the "fake president" and 2024, if Biden (unjustly) prevails. .................
The battle is not over. It was always going to boil down to the legislatures without SCOTUS. If we keep up the fight, we shall win with knowledge and the law on our side.
Other alternatives? There's a lot of talk out there, but I chose to use the one above and here's what the real hero of this election is doing.
I'll be covering more tonight and in the morning, and I'll post then.
Best wishes to us all!
No comments:
Post a Comment