Connect with us


As more states join Texas, Missouri in SCOTUS election challenge, it’s just the beginning of the battle to uphold the Constitution



Supreme Court

Social media platforms are blowing up with rumor and speculation as to which other states in the union may join Texas, along with Missouri, in challenging the November 3, general election ballot irregularities and allegations of voter fraud in the Supreme Court

What does it mean if other states join the lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and can anything be ultimately done to change the outcome of the election? It’s uncertain. But one thing is certain, President Donald Trump is leading the GOP. His national policies, his approach to foreign policy and his straightforward way of speaking have awoken the American public and put more than 74 million American voters on his side.

So the Texas lawsuit, although criticized by some opponents as political theater is no such thing, it is a statement to the people that Trump, and his true allies are not done fighting the swamp. It was filed directly to the Supreme Court and it asserts that “unlawful election results” in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin and Michigan should be declared unconstitutional.

From the opening of the Texas lawsuit:

“Our Country stands at an important crossroads. Either the Constitution matters and must be followed, even when some officials consider it inconvenient or out of date, or it is simply a piece of parchment on display at the National Archives. We ask the Court to choose the former.

Lawful elections are at the heart of our constitutional democracy. The public, and indeed the candidates themselves, have a compelling interest in ensuring that the selection of a President—any President—is legitimate. If that trust is lost, the American Experiment will founder. A dark cloud hangs over the 2020 Presidential election.

Here is what we know. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a justification, government officials in the defendant states of Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (collectively, “Defendant States”), usurped their legislatures’ authority and unconstitutionally revised their state’s election statutes. They accomplished these statutory revisions through executive fiat or friendly lawsuits, thereby weakening ballot integrity. Finally, these same government officials flooded the Defendant States with millions of ballots to be sent through the mails, or placed in drop boxes, with little or no chain of custody and, at the same time, weakened the strongest security measures protecting the integrity of the vote—signature verification and witness requirements.

Texas SCOTUS lawsuit

Moreover, a slew of witnesses across the nation have testified under penalty of perjury that they were witnesses to alleged fraud and serious irregularities that need to be investigated. They have described those massive irregularities, failures by the poll workers to abide by the rules of fairness, missing and rediscovered travel drives with thousands of ballots and early morning drops offs of thousands of ballots for now President-Elect Joe Biden that changed the outcome of the election. For the most part, they have either been ridiculed or dismissed by the major media outlets. Relegated to the sidelines of conspiracy theories by those partisan networks who hate Trump and support Biden.

There was also the ongoing concern brought up in the Texas lawsuit arguing that the states targeted by the lawsuit used the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to unlawfully change election rules “through executive fiat or friendly lawsuits, thereby weakening ballot integrity.”

Jenna Ellis, a lawyer representing President Trump in his battle against state election irregularities, told me Wednesday that the separate lawsuit filed by Paxton on behalf of Texas, “is about official misconduct in violation of the Constitution.”

“Neither state officials nor courts can change state election rules,” said Ellis. “The Constitution makes it clear that this is the job only for the legislature. It is important that the Supreme Court uphold the Constitution and our rule of law.”

Paxton, of Texas, is asking the Supreme Court to stand with the requirements of the Constitution despite the difficulties it will face by opponents of Trump. He notes in the lawsuit that fundamentally the lawsuit is about protecting the foundation of America: its Constitution. Now Missouri is asking the same. Maybe others will join. I have spoken to sources that contend that Alabama and possibly Louisiana may join the suit.

Steven Crowder, with the podcast Louder with Crowder, posted on Twitter that possibly “8 states are tentatively set to join the Texas SCOTUS suit, but have not been publicly confirmed.”

Everyone on social media is guessing, not because it will change the outcome of the election but because the like the American people, the states (through their Attorney Generals) are also awakened and on a quest to expose what they believe was a fraudulent election in the United States.

I believe that others will join the lawsuit. It is not certain what the Supreme Court will decide. The Justices have already denied a request from Pennsylvania GOP to block the certification of vote sin the commonwealth’s election. That was certainly a blow to Republicans but as many have said “the fights not over until it’s over.”

I personally believe no matter what the outcome the election, the fight in our nation is just beginning and will not be resolved for decades to come.

You can follow Sara A. Carter on Parler @SaraCarterOfficial or on Twitter @SaraCarterDC

You may like

Continue Reading


Biden impeachment hearing to begin this week, GOP announces first witnesses



Screen Shot 2021 06 02 at 3.20.41 PM

The House Overusing Committee is holding the first impeachment hearing into President Joe Biden this Thursday and has announced the first three interview witnesses. The impeachment process will assess whether then Vice President Joe Biden received a bribe from a Ukrainian businessman to change the outcome of U.S. policy.

The committee announced three witnesses, including George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley, former Assistant Attorney General, United States Department of Justice Tax Division Eileen O’Connor, and forensic accountant Bruce Dubinsky.

“Since January, House Committees on Oversight and Accountability, Judiciary, and Ways and Means have uncovered an overwhelming amount of evidence showing President Joe Biden abused his public office for his family’s financial gain,” said Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-KY) who also made the following lengthy statements:

“Thousands of pages of financial records, emails, texts, testimony from credible IRS whistleblowers, and a transcribed interview with Biden family business associate Devon Archer all reveal that Joe Biden allowed his family to sell him as ‘the brand’ around the world to enrich the Biden family. Joe Biden showed up on at least two dozen occasions to send signals of access, influence, and power to those who were paying the Bidens.” 

“Based on the evidence, Congress has a duty to open an impeachment inquiry into President Biden’s corruption. Americans demand and deserve answers, transparency, and accountability for this abuse of public office…This week, the House Oversight Committee will present evidence uncovered to date and hear from legal and financial experts about crimes the Bidens may have committed as they brought in millions at the expense of U.S. interests.”

Just The News reports: Prompting the impeachment inquiry is an unclassified FD-1023 form that contains confidential human source information outlining an alleged bribery effort. The tip describes an arrangement in which Burisma CEO Mykola Zlochevsky allegedly hired Hunter Biden to secure access to his father, upon whom he leaned to secure the firing of then-Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, who was investigating the firm.

You may like

Continue Reading