Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It might interest you to know that if this whole thing keeps rolling to Jan. 6, then yes it will be the Congress (US House) that will select the electors. But it won't be by popular vote. It is done by STATES, each one having one vote, and that puts Donald Trump in the White House for 4 MORE YEARS, undoubtedly.Already did. In fact, it’s in the quote to this very thread.
article 2, section 1, clause 4
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
Nov 7...so?No one dropped claims that poll watchers were hampered and hindered by Biden monkeys.The Trump campaign has long since dropped their claims that pollwatchers were not allowed. You need to catch up on the facts. Protestors screaming at poll workers are not poll watchers.
Your complaints are a FARCE. Even judges appointed by Trump have thrown your asses out of court you lying NAZI.
Been visiting with your Old Grandad again?
"President Donald Trump's campaign has dropped the allegation from its federal lawsuit challenging the results of Pennsylvania's election which claimed that hundreds of thousands of ballots in the key swing state had been illegally counted without Republican poll observers present."
Trump campaign drops claim that GOP poll observers weren't allowed to watch Pennsylvania vote count (msn.com)
HA HA. But you have it BACKWARDS. It is Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, and many others who are lined up behind the Constitution. That is the crux of the case. It is the 4 cheater states who are in VIOLATION of the Constitution (Article 2, Section 1), that are the defendants.Dumbfuck, I quoted what is being reported about the Texas lawsuit.
And while a bunch of states have lined up behind Texas, a bunch of other states have lined up behind the Constitution...
WASHINGTON — More than two dozen states filed motions with the Supreme Court on Thursday opposing Texas' bid to invalidate President-elect Joe Biden's wins in four battleground states, a long-shot legal move that Pennsylvania blasted as a "seditious abuse of the judicial process."
And while you're washing out your mouth with soap, gargle with some strong mouthwash too.
So it's all bullshit.Nov 7...so?
That's just Pennsylvania. And that's far left Salon doing that reporting.
Bullshit! Say hi to Old Grandad.
Liberals should be grateful for the Internet.So it's all bullshit.Nov 7...so?
If the legislature didn't approve it, then it's illegal.Mail-in voting, for one, asshole.Which rules were changed illegally?You aren't thinking if you think it is simple. I hope that is an exception for you, and not the norm.See page 15 for standing...."This is about Texas challenging state laws, BECAUSE I WANT IT TO BE!!! FUCK EVERYTHING THAT HAS TOLD ME REPEATEDLY THAT THIS IS ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION, BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE THAT THING!!!"
No, it's because they don't have standing, dumbass.
It's like CA suing TX for allowing fracking.
God you guys are stupid.
"The constitutional failures of Defendant States injure Plaintiff States because [the right of suffrage is denied]."
The right to suffrage isn't denied. The folks in Texas got to vote.
The idea that you've lost your right to sufferage if your candidate loses is silly.
If states illegally change their voting rules, such that the election outcome is changed, all of the people in other states who voted for other candidates have effectively had their votes nullified, illegally.
It's somewhat analogous to water rights of states that share the same river. If an upstream state builds a dam, the other states still have access to the river basin, but when they turn on their taps, they don't get as much water as before.
And the proper forum for recourse is the Supreme Court.
It's my opinion that the Dems in some states used the plandemic to illegally steal the election, in violation of their, and the US Constitutions. It's similar to stealing the river water that adjacent states share.
Virginia also changed its voting regulations this year, rather dramatically, but they did it through the legislature, consistent with the Constitution.
Regards,
Jim
Nothing illegal about it.
Which has what to do with Texas, et al?That's just Pennsylvania. And that's far left Salon doing that reporting.
Bullshit! Say hi to Old Grandad.
In the other states, judges threw out the claim. Worth noting that he has dropped the claims from all of the filings.
I have to agree. The Supreme Court is like an umpire, ready to step in when one teams cheatsThat's exactly how Trump feels. What good is a Supreme Court if you can't use it to over turn a corrupt election, right?
and ignores laws and rules.
Also worth noting that the vote cheating is over now. NO one is doing that sort of work now.In the other states, judges threw out the claim. Worth noting that he has dropped the claims from all of the filings.
Are you claiming to be qualified to be on the Supreme Court?I have to agree. The Supreme Court is like an umpire, ready to step in when one teams cheatsThat's exactly how Trump feels. What good is a Supreme Court if you can't use it to over turn a corrupt election, right?
and ignores laws and rules.
The Supreme Court is not a umpire when it illegally steals a election.
So, the Supreme Court has illegally stolen an election?The Supreme Court is not a umpire when it illegally steals a election.
That's what you folks are hoping forSo, the Supreme Court has illegally stolen an election?The Supreme Court is not a umpire when it illegally steals a election.
Glug, glug.....drinky drinky.
Yeah...I didn't make that ignorant claim. I actually think the court is going to restore order andThat's what you folks are hoping for
That is yer jist from a media outlet have you researched to find that Pennsylvania did use the process of legislature to okay the changes to the election?
I did just tell you about Pennsylvania and why the Pennsylvania SC rejected the argument that the legislature should have amended the state constitution yet the Penn. SC said it was argued past the statue of limitation had expired.That is yer jist from a media outlet have you researched to find that Pennsylvania did use the process of legislature to okay the changes to the election?
Why don't YOU tell us yourself, or are you a typical drive by poster?
Why don't YOU tell us yourself, or are you a typical drive by poster?
