Connect with us

Elections

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

Published

on

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 Either the Constitution matters and must be followed, even when some officials consider it inconvenient or out of date, or it is simply a piece of parchment on display at the National Archives.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.

https://twitter.com/scrowder/status/1336660528874328064

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

Elections

Biden’s Poor Polling and Harris’ Low Electability Rating Could Have Democrats Considering ‘Nuclear Option’

Behind-the-scenes discussion of how Democrats could arrive at a third option for the next election is underway

Published

on

Biden Kamala
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

With polls consistently showing a poor approval rating for President Joe Biden at below 40 percent, and a recent poll put Kamala Harris’ electability at only 28 percent, Democrats are in full panic mode.

Behind-the-scenes discussion of how Democrats could arrive at a third option for the next election is underway. Operatives are preparing for the possibility of a contested presidential primary in which other would-be nominees take on Ms. Harris, but that could be damaging for the party” reports the Telegraph.

Therefore, Democrats are allegedly whispering about a potential “nuclear option” that would call for current Vice President Harris to be nominated to the Supreme Court. The Telegraph writes that “while the scenario is highly improbable, and perhaps a reflection of a Washington rumor mill in overdrive, the fact it has come up at all shows the depths of the predicament the Biden administration currently finds itself in, amid rising inflation, a stalled domestic agenda, and foreign policy disasters.”

The theory in question would call for President Biden to nominate Harris to the Supreme Court in the event a seat opens in the next three years during his administration. Biden could then use “Section 2 of the 25thAmendment to nominate a more popular vice president”, adds the Telegraph.

Under Section 1 of the 25th Amendment, that new vice president could assume the presidency if Biden were to step down while president. They would then become the Democratic nominee in the 2024 presidential election. That same individual could also be the presumptive Democratic nominee in 2024 if Biden chooses not to run for re-election.

One piece of information that is wetting Democrats’ whistle is that current Supreme Court Justice Breyer has said he does not “want to stay on the Supreme Court until I die.”

The Telegraph notes that “the discussion over potential successors to Mr. Biden is highly unusual less than a year into an administration.”

You may like

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending Now

Advertisement

Trending